[URL=www.archaeologydaily.com/news/201006124299/Mithraic-Mysteries-and-the-Cult-of-Empire.html] has a couple of points that lead in the direction of a more plausible interpretation involving the worship or Mithras.
It appears, from the testimony of Tertullian, that initiates underwent various purification ceremonies, swore oaths of secrecy, and received brands on the hands or forehead betokening their membership in the order.
A brand on hand or forehead is certainly a better fit for the "Mark of the Beast" than anything proposed by those taking a futurist interpretation.
But there is more...
One of the accomplishments of Rome's evilest emperor was to bring the Armenian king Tiridates to Rome for his coronation. As Tiridates prostrated himself before the Roman emperor, he informed Nero that he would worship him as he worshipped the great god Mithra
Nero is frequently considered a likely candidate for the "Beast". Could it simply be a prediction that the Imperial cult, under Nero would copy a feature of Mithras worship ?
quote: Marks and numbers are being implanted in tiny computer chip inplants. This is the obvious likly methodology of how it emerges into fulfillment.
You seem to confuse "corroboration" with "contradiction". From your comment it seems clear that even you recognise that the Bible does NOT accurately describe any system that might be plausibly created in the forseeable future. The Bible talks of readable marks on hand and forehead, not implants that cannot even be seen.
quote: There's loads of corroborating prophecies, either fulfilled or emerging into fulfillment, in both OT and NT, all corroborating a Biblically prophesied end time apocalypse. This prophecy is just one of the many.
By which you mean that your twisted misrepresentations of the Bible match your twisted fantasies.
Firstly, even if the Revelation doesn't exclude additional information, it doesn't tell us that any is present or even give a reason why any additional information would be needed. As I pointed out it sounds much more like the Mithraic Brands which were likely around at the time than anything Buz suggests.
And how can Buz be proven wrong ? With no time limit he can always say that it's coming soon until the day he dies. Anyone who actually follows international affairs can see that it isn't coming soon. There are too many disputes over exchange rates and arguments over national sovereignty to consider a global currency even a remote possibility in the forseeable future. And just look at what is happening with the Euro ! A global currency would be a far more difficult problem !
That's not even remotely likely. You assume a complete collapse of the financial systems of every major country in the world. OK it's possible, but not that likely. Then that they happen to all get together and build one world system. That sounds even less likely. And that system is going to set the same wages everywhere ? And presumably the same prices ? Good luck with that !
And it still doesn't resemble anything in the Revelation.
quote: There are things yet to be completed before Armageddon and the 2nd advent of Jesus etc. Armageddon, the finality of the end times when Jerusalem is invaded are in the relative near future; most likely within the next 40 years; likely sooner than later.
By which you mean that even you know that there's a lot more that has to happen before you can say that the time really is close. And if it doesn't happen, so much for your 40 years.
quote: All that needs to be observed for the Buz take on these prophecies is a continuation of the progression of corroborating events as prophecied;
Of course, you're short on real corroboration so that makes your "next 40 years" prediction look even sillier.
quote: progression towards one world monetary marks and numbers
There's no significant progress towards that and it isn't even mentioned in the Bible as shown in this thread. So even if it was happening it wouldn't count.
quote: progression of hostility towards Israel (that is after a prophesied 3 1/2 year truce)
That doesn't seem to have progressed much since the 1940's - witness the peace deals with Egypt, Jordan and Syria. And correct me if I'm wrong but the 3 1/2 year truce is from Daniel, not Revelation. Which is a whole other can of worms.
quote: progression towards persecution of Christian (i.e. the great tribulation),
That doesn't seem to be happening much either. So there are some places where Christians undergo persecution. And there are other places, like the U.S., where their idea of "persecution" is not having special rights. It hardly compares to the times of the Roman persecutions - around the time that the Revelation was written. So all you have is speculation that things are going to get much worse than they are
quote: progression of the expansion and rise of Islam, continued dimishment of the Wester powers
None of which is mentioned in the Bible at all. You won't find any mention of the U.S. or Western European states or Islam.
quote: and the increase of powers via a Russian, European and Islam block nation alliance emerging into the final superpowers ever increasing their allied domination of the UN global beast/final Gentile global empire.
More stuff that just isn't in the Bible.
In other words must of your corroboration is just - as I said - your twisted reading of the Bible agreeing with your twisted fantasies.
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein. Address only topic related comments, if there are any. AdminPD
quote: Perhaps sometime you will understand that in order to figure out any given Biblical prophecy study entails all corroborating prophecies related to what is being studied. Scripture interprets scripture.
Says the guy who relies on taking little pieces of prophecies out of their immediate context to claim fulfillments.
So why don't you include Daniel 8:22-23 which tells us that the "end times" will take place in the "latter days" of the Diadochi Kingdoms ?
Why do you ignore the differences between Luke's version of the Olivet discourse and the version found in Mark and Matthew ? Or the fact that Luke places the Tribulation before the fall of Jerusalem ?
quote: By isolating any prophetic book of the Biblical prophecies you will never come to the correct understanding. That's why novices like Jar, you and some others don't get it right. You're wading in the shallows when you need to be swimming in the deep to engage in prophecy debates.
Then just taking bits of pieces out of context is going to be even worse, so I guess that you don't even reach novice status. I suppose that explains why you get things wrong all the time. And all the nonsense you try to add to the Bible doesn't help. You've been caught at it time and time again, do you really think that you are going to get away with it this time ?
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein. AdminPD
You are making some strong claims here. To avoid dragging this thread too far off both the topic and your discussion with Faith are you prepared to start a new thread.
I'll note in particular:
quote: It is the Lord's prophetic scriptures that drew me to the Bible and convinced me that the Bible is what it claims to be .... the very Word of the Lord of creation
I am a skeptic and a realist and need proof for understanding and acceptance for most anything .... I have it .... no doubt .... the Bible is His Word
I'll just note that the Bible doesn't actually claim that. There are sections of many books which claim to be relaying God's words but that very distinction tends to suggest that the surrounding text is not, nor is there any good reason for supposing that it is. Even if you could show that the prophecies came from God it would not establish that all the other parts of the Bible did. A skeptic and a realist ought to be aware of that.
quote: Hang on if you want and I will continue to post on this forum with a focus upon the prophetic scriptures ..... this is all that I do .... my witness to the authenticity of the Lord's incredible and totally believable more sure word of prophecy [2 Peter 1:16-21]
I believe that is untrue. But if you can make the case - another thread is the place to do it.
You do realise that your argument with Faith is entirely different from trying to convince a skeptic ? You'll both put the belief that prophecy cannot fail ahead of the Bible, just as you put your belief that the bible claims to be the literal word of God ahead of the fact that not one book of the Bible actually makes that claim for itself,
Even in your replies to Faith I can see obvious problems that a skeptic familiar with the Bible would know and that Faith will not discuss. For instance the fact that the "little horn" of Daniel 8 is quite clearly Antiochus IV.
To start with I note that you gloss over Daniel 8, which should be surprising since it is the obvious starting place.
In Daniel 8 we start with the Goat representing the Greek empire of Alexander and the divided states that sprang from it. It is from one of these that the little horn springs (9) We are also told that the prophecy takes place in the latter days of the Greek kingdoms(22) leaving no doubt that the "little horn" is a ruler of one of these states. Since the "little horn" is depicted as subduing Judah, setting himself up as equal to God, doing away with the Jewish sacrifice and so on, there is no doubt that it is Antiochus.
With regard to Daniel 11 aside from your strange idea that the prophecy suddenly changes subject, jumping thousands of years into the future with no hint in the text all I can say is that is hardly a straightforward reading - if it even qualifies as a reading.
In the case of Daniel 7:7-8 I will simply point out that Antiochus was preceded by seven Seleucid kings, briefly by the usurper Heliodors and technically by two of his nephews (the first Demetrios the heir, the second another Antiochus in whose name he ruled for a while). Seven and three who could be counted as "uprooted"
As for other books of the Bible it may well be true that they are not speaking of Antiochus but that does not mean that Daniel 8 is not. Certainly they cannot overrule the text of Daniel 8 that tells us that it is Antiochus.
So, all in all you don't really present much of a case. A straightforward reading of Daniel 8 tells us that it is Antiochus. It will take more than questionable (at best) interpretations of other verses - especially from other books of the Bible - to show otherwise.
Again, Daniel 8 clearly identifies the little horn as a Diadochi ruler. The Diadochi states are long gone - their "latter days" passed before Jesus was born. Thus the prophecy failed.
And really Antiochus was a proud, crafty and succesful ruler, promoting his own worship as Zeus, so he fits the description in Daniel 8 rather well (especially if we allow that 8:10 is certainly symbolic)
quote: I do not use the quote button on the forum .... or on any forum for that matter
Reason .... to avoid the unnecessary repeating of scads of the details of a previous posting of any poster
There is no "quote" button on this forum, for precisely that reason. Moreover you have been using the "reply" buttons - but belonging to the wrong posts. So even if you had mistaken the "reply" button for a "quote" button you would have been using it.
I would also suggest using the quote tag or the as tag instead of quote marks, as most posters already do. Both make quoted text stand out much more.