Search results

That's interesting because Solomon - the wisest man who ever lived - said "money is a defence"...by implication against hunger, against homelessness, against sickness, etc. Are you wiser than he in calling it "evil"?

Repeating your premise over and over is not a reasonable answer to the direct challenge I've made to it. Once again, are you able or not to point to a single text in all of Scripture where a "beast" is interpreted by man, angel, or God as "currency" in the same way that I've pointed to Daniel...

"...and all the world wondered after the Beast."

Wrong, it is papists like yourself who represent the crowd who walked away in that they likewise believed Jesus spoke literally, not having Holy Spirit discernment that He was speaking figuratively. LITERALLY eating His flesh and LITERALLY drinking His blood profiteth nothing is what He meant...

"When the Swiss Reformer Huldrych Zwingli became the pastor of the Grossmünster in Zurich (1518) he began to preach ideas on reforming the Catholic Church. Zwingli, who was a Catholic priest before he became a Reformer, often referred to the Pope as the Antichrist. He wrote: "I know that in it...

That's a pretty bold statement. What are the commands of the "Torah"?

So, when Jesus told John the Baptist, "Suffer it (Jesus' baptism) to be so, for it becomes us to fulfill all righteousness", that means "righteousness" is no longer required, no longer in effect, right? Romans 6:16 says otherwise. So do a host of other NT Scriptures. "Fulfill the law" means to...

The problem with your "beast is a currency" idea is that there's no Biblical precedent for it. What we do have as a precedent is the symbol of a "beast" interpreted as a "kingdom"...several times. And the only kingdom to fit all the identifying marks of prophecy's Antichrist is the papacy.

The Antichrist must arise within the church, not outside, which is what a renegade Jew would be. Also, the "future temple" is not future, but the present "church" -the New Testament "temple of God". Furthermore, the Mark has to do with God's law, since those who do not get the Mark are said...

No, the Antichrist arose right on time, according to prophecy, among the Ten Horns of the fallen pagan Roman Empire - the papacy. The papacy arose among them as the Little Horn which: "plucked three of the first horns" (destroyed the Heruli, Vandals, and Ostrogoths) was a "diverse" kingdom...

Revelation tells us what the issue of the Mark of the Beast concerns, AND IT AIN'T CURRENCY, FIAT OR OTHERWISE. According to Revelation 14, it just makes sense that if those who do not get the Mark are said to "keep the Commandments of God and have the faith of Jesus", then those who do get the...

It isn't "truly" the body and blood of Christ. In John 6, when the disciples heard Jesus tell them they must "eat My flesh and drink My blood", they were put off, so Jesus clarified what He meant by saying, ...the flesh (the flesh that the people thought He wanted them to eat) profiteth nothing...

Marymog, they all DID receive the same answer: that salvation is by grace through faith in God's promises, not by works...and that the Roman catholic papacy is the Antichrist of prophecy. Let's not forget that several times two popes reigned, each claiming the other was illegit...or the...

The woman is the RCC and the beast upon which she rides is the secular state, just like apostate Jezebel who held the reins of Ahab.

A "woman" in prophecy represents the "church". The "woman clothed in light" of Revelation 12 represents God's people and the harlot woman represents the Roman Catholic church.

I tell you the truth, I lie not. If you do not surrender that sin to Jesus, you will burn up with it in the end. Works cannot save us, but they surely condemn us. No one is holding a gun to your head when you indulge it, right? You do so because you love it - sin is pleasurable. The question is...

So, you don't recognize the 1,260 year apostasy that took place in the 6th century when the papacy took over Christianity and dragged every stripe and type of paganism into the midst of it, when millions of CHURCH SANCTIONED murders of innocent, God-fearing people took place, the Bible was...

But we can know if we follow the prophetic timeline, which identifies a succession of kingdoms with each successive one following on the heels of the previous one. Daniel 2 establishes Babylon as the starting point of that timeline, followed by Medo-Persian, Greece, Rome, the Ten Barbarian...

Why should the Bible have to prove your negative when it POSITIVELY identifies "beast" with "kingdom" several times?

It is precisely what the Bible calls Antichrist. It cannot be a single individual because: it was predicted to rise among the ten barbarian nations which arose out of pagan Rome it was to continue from that time - 6th century A.D. - all the way to the return of Christ. It is IMPOSSIBLE for...