Mark of the beast idea

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Bowas

I may not have all the answers, but I do have these scriptures that positively gives the answer.

According to the words of Jesus here, who is the guilty?

Mat 23:34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
Mat 23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
Mat 23:36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.
Mat 23:37 O JERUSALEM JERUSALEM, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

Thanks for the post...I got my wires crossed on the blood of Able thing..you are right in the post above, but this is pronouncing judgement on the group of 70 ad.

This has no resemblance to the burning city of Rev.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Bowas

I may not have all the answers, but I do have these scriptures that positively gives the answer.

According to the words of Jesus here, who is the guilty?

Mat 23:34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
Mat 23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
Mat 23:36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.
Mat 23:37 O JERUSALEM JERUSALEM, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

Amen. Jesus said ALL the blood shed. If Jerusalem was the recipient of THAT guilt in AD70, then NO ONE ELSE CAN HAVE ALL THE BLOOD. If it was Rome who LATER slew believers, it would still not be ALL THE BLOOD IN ROME, because Jerusalem had it from Abel to Zecharias. Rome AT BEST could have PART of the blood. But Jesus said ALL the blood. That demands Rev 18:24 be ONLY JERUSALEM. TWO entities cannot have ALL of the same thing!

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Bowas

Scripturally (Jesus) speaking, it cannot be Rome or any other city for precisely the verses Mike Blume presented. Rome in no way was or can be construde to be guilty of all the righteous blood all the way back to Able.

Right TWO cannot have ALL. It's either Jerusalem who had ALL according to Jesus or NO ONE ELSE! ANYONE ELSE who slew saints after Jesus spoke those words could only have PART of the blood shed on earth.

Sean,

HOW CAN ROME HAVE IT ALL, when Jesus said Jerusalem did? Do you know what ALL means? If you had ALL THE LEGOS (lol) ever created up to that time back in 2008, who could anyone else LATER say they have them ALL? They don't have what you had! They cannot have ALL.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Right TWO cannot have ALL. It's either Jerusalem who had ALL according to Jesus or NO ONE ELSE! ANYONE ELSE who slew saints after Jesus spoke those words could only have PART of the blood shed on earth.

Sean,

HOW CAN ROME HAVE IT ALL, when Jesus said Jerusalem did? Do you know what ALL means? If you had ALL THE LEGOS (lol) ever created up to that time back in 2008, who could anyone else LATER say they have them ALL? They don't have what you had! They cannot have ALL.

Mike, there was a judgement on Jerusalem in 70 ad, and there will be a future horrible judgement on Rome causing no life in it during the entire Millennial.

Sorry bro. these are 2 different judgements on 2 different cities at 2 different times, around 2000 years apart(if the Lord returns today.....)

[Sean]

Jerusalem
Founded: 3000 BC
Area: 48.3 sq miles (125.1 km²)
Weather: 60°F (16°C), Wind W at 3 mph (5 km/h), 86% Humidity
Local time: Thursday 8:40 PM
Population: 780,517 (2010


Same city?, this happened in 70ad?...Na, I don't think so....




Rev 18:21 And a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone, and cast it into the sea, saying, Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all.

22 And the voice of harpers, and musicians, and of pipers, and trumpeters, shall be heard no more at all in thee; and no craftsman, of whatsoever craft he be, ]shall be found any more in thee; and the sound of a millstone shall be heard no more at all in thee;

23 And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.


This city in Rev. will be uninhabitable from this point of judgement, to the end of the world.

[Bowas]

Originally Posted by Sean

Thanks for the post...I got my wires crossed on the blood of Able thing..you are right in the post above, but this is pronouncing judgement on the group of 70 ad.

This has no resemblance to the burning city of Rev.

Sean. I agree with you that Matt23:35 recorded Jesus saying this is referring to AD70, but don't you find it more than just a little curious, or more than coincidental as to the idententical language found in Rev. 18:24? How can it refer to anything other than what Matt. was referring to?

Matthew 23:35 KJV That upon you (JERUSALEM) may come ALL the righteous blood shed UPON THE EARTH, from THE BLOOD of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

Revelation 18:24 KJV And in her (BABYLON) was found THE BLOOD of prophets, and of saints, and of ALL that were slain UPON THE EARTH.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Bowas

Sean. I agree with you that Matt23:35 recorded Jesus saying this is referring to AD70, but don't you find it more than just a little curious, or more than coincidental as to the idententical language found in Rev. 18:24? How can it refer to anything other than what Matt. was referring to?

Matthew 23:35 KJV That upon you (JERUSALEM) may come ALL the righteous blood shed UPON THE EARTH, from THE BLOOD of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

Revelation 18:24 KJV And in her (BABYLON) was found THE BLOOD of prophets, and of saints, and of ALL that were slain UPON THE EARTH.

Yes, there are some similarities, just like Noahs days and the days of the coming of Christ. They are different times with different judgements, but the similar sins bring them similar judgements.

Both Jerusalem and Rome share in the blood of the prophets, as we know in history and Biblically....However, Jerusalem was judged by the Gentiles and The City of Rome will be judged by God Himself.....God's judgement will cause the city to be permanently uninhabitable.

The Gentiles judgement on Jerusalem allowed the city to be quickly reinhabited by Gentiles.

The Judgement in Rev. is very much more severe than the one brought on Jerusalem.


The Great Whore, Rome has murdered millions of souls, decieved billions and perverted Christianity in the eyes of the whole world. There is a huge difference in the amount of the sins of Jerusalem and the sins of Rome. A memorial of its sins will be made of the city(Rome) for the duration of the Millennium to be a testimony of what happened.

Trust me, the insanity of the Catholic Church will be made an example of by our Lord when He returns! The multitudes of saints in Rev 6 and 7 will get to see justice for their sufferings...


Rev. 6:10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?



Rev 7:9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;

Rev 7:10 And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb.

11 And all the angels stood round about the throne, and about the elders and the four beasts, and fell before the throne on their faces, and worshipped God,

12 Saying, Amen: Blessing, and glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiving, and honour, and power, and might, be unto our God for ever and ever. Amen.

13 And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they?

14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

15 Therefore are they before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple: and he that sitteth on the throne shall dwell among them.

16 They shall hunger no more, neither thirst any more; neither shall the sun light on them, nor any heat.

17 For the Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them, and shall lead them unto living fountains of waters: and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Sean

Mike, there was a judgement on Jerusalem in 70 ad, and there will be a future horrible judgement on Rome causing no life in it during the entire Millennial.

Sorry bro. these are 2 different judgements on 2 different cities at 2 different times, around 2000 years apart(if the Lord returns today.....)

That cannot be true. You did not read what I said. Jerusalem was accused of ALL the blood shed on earth. ALL means ALL. And if another city like Rome is guilty of shedding blood, it still cannot be said to have SHED ALL BLOOD after Jerusalem shed ALL. rev 18:24 said the woman had ALL the blood shed on the earth in her. ALL. What does ALL MEAN? how can two different cities have ALL of the blood?

Just so you do not read past this again, let me ask you a question.

Let's say there were 500 trees in your back yard, and you cut ALL of them down from the start of time until today. Then more trees grow, and next year someone else cuts down the additional trees. That second person cannot be said to have cut down all the trees that ever grew there, because you cut all of the previous trees down. the second person can only be said to cut down PART of the trees that ever grew there.

Same thing with Jerusalem and Rome. Jesus said Jerusalem was guilty of ALL BLOOD SHED ON EARTH up to that time. LATER, Rome killed people and shed blood. But you cannot say Rome shed ALL THE BLOOD because Jerusalem shed ALL THE BLOOD that was shed before that! Rome can only be accused of shedding PART of the blood. Well, Rev 18:24 says the woman shed ALL THE BLOOD.

See what I mean?

Only ONE PARTY could have shed ALL the blood. If Jesus said Jerusalem shed it ALL, then no other city can be said to do the same LATER. It does not make sense. ALL means ALL, or else the meaning of all is GONE.

[Bowas]

The word "all" puts a limit on to who it can be. If in Matt it is positively identified as Jerusalem is guilty of "all" then that would be the identity of the Mystery, Babylon the great that too is guilty of "all." Cannot have more than one guilty of "all," as Mike Blume has shown. In short, "all" says it all.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Bowas

The word "all" puts a limit on to who it can be. If in Matt it is positively identified as Jerusalem is guilty of "all" then that would be the identity of the Mystery, Babylon the great that too is guilty of "all." Cannot not have more than one guilty of "all," as Mike Blume has shown. In short, "all" says it all.

Amen.