It's the correct chapter -- that is where Augustine talks about Revelations.
I just meant that the notes that followed were pretty much the only things that were mentioned about the mark of the beast.
Truth Teller said:Also, I'm happy you're reading the Bible, but I'd strongly encourage using either the New Jerusalem Bible or the New Revised Standard Version. They're the most faithful to the original Hebrew/Greek's meaning. The KJV is a masterpiece of the English language, but relies upon outdated manuscripts.
Roosh said:Now I want to mention a theory, something I can't possibly verify. I believe that many world governments do experiments with psychedelics to explore other dimensions. They have figured out the right dosage and mix of drugs to create encounters with "advanced" beings who then give them instructions for ways at world domination (high technology). Alex Jones talked about this in his last podcast with Joe Rogan, and how when we do what the beings instruct, things work. If this is true, those beings must be demons. In other words, it's very possible that this "world system" of "globalization" is not just Satanic in spirit, but also in formulation.
Sword and Board said:
I recommend to any interested to do some research on the strategic misinterpretations of the doctrines, missing verses and calculated subversions in many modern bible translations.
The Beast1 said:"The texts and scholars of Islam teach that all Muslims must strive for global domination at all times
Horus said:At the beginning of the gay rights movement, it was all about ending discrimination regardless of the way that God/nature had made them. They just wanted the right to live their lives without interference from zealous busybodies trying to stick their noses into matters which were none of their business. It was difficult to argue with - even if you were disgusted by their lifestyle, it makes sense to treat everyone with respect as long as they are not causing any harm.
Then as soon as they got what they were asking for, it's like the dam was burst and there was a cascade of unforseen consequences. Gays in the military. Drag queens in schools. Anal sex in sex ed. Tranny bathrooms. Mothers encouraging their sons to be transgender. Deviants prancing around the streets in leather BDSM gear in front of children in their "pride" parades. Gays adopting children. Gay wedding cakes controversy. Now this platonic parenting heresy. And coming to a Western country soon, paedophile acceptance.
Is almost as if our ancestors have been through this before in various forms, and the ancient prohibition of homosexuality was the result of accumulated wisdom from the experience of what happens when gays are allowed to be out and proud. It's nothing to do with hate and everything to do with keeping societies healthy. Sure, that sucks for gays who can't help the way they were born, and I don't want to see them being punished or facing harm for the way they are. But it's necessary for them to stay strictly in the closet, to keep their degeneracy well away from prying eyes, and to be in no doubt that if they flaunt their lifestyle they will face unpleasant consequences.
Then as soon as they got what they were asking for, it's like the dam was burst and there was a cascade of unforseen consequences
First, if the apostle John were indeed writing in AD 95—long after the destruction of the temple— it seems incredible that he would make no mention whatsoever of the most apocalyptic event in Jewish history—the demolition of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple at the hands of Titus. Imagine writing a history of New York today and making no mention of the destruction of the twin towers of the World Trade Center at the hands of terrorists on September 11, 2001. Or, more directly, imagine writing a thesis on the future of terrorism in America and failing to mention the Manhattan Massacre.
Consider another parallel. Imagine that you are reading a history concerning Jewish struggles in Nazi Germany and find no mention whatsoever of the Holocaust. Would it not be reasonable to suppose that this history was written prior to the outbreak of World War II? The answer is self-evident. Just as it stretches credulity to suggest that a history of the Jews in Germany would be written in the aftermath of World War II and yet make no mention of the Holocaust, so too it is unreasonable to think that Revelation was written twenty-five years after the destruction of Jerusalem and yet makes no mention of the most apocalyptic event in Jewish history.
Furthermore, those who hold that the book of Revelation was written long after the destruction of the temple in AD 70 face an even more formidable obstacle! Consider one of the most amazing prophecies in all of Scripture.
Jesus is leaving the temple when his disciples call his attention to its buildings. As they gaze upon its massive stones and magnificent buildings, Jesus utters the unthinkable: “I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down” (Matthew 24:2; Mark 13:2; Luke 21:6). One generation later this prophecy, no doubt still emblazoned on the tablet of their consciousness, became a vivid and horrifying reality. As noted by Josephus, the temple was doomed August 30, AD 70, “the very day on which the former temple had been destroyed by the king of Babylon.”
As incredible as Christ’s prophecy and its fulfillment one generation later are, it is equally incredible to suppose that the apostle John would make no mention of it. As the student of Scripture well knows, New Testament writers were quick to highlight fulfilled prophecy. The phrase “This was to fulfill what was spoken of by the prophet” permeates the pages of Scripture. Thus, it is inconceivable that Jesus would make an apocalyptic prophecy concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish temple and that John would fail to mention that the prophecy was fulfilled one generation later just as Jesus had predicted it.
Finally, let me highlight an additional piece of internal evidence that should give pause to those who are overly dogmatic about the late-dating of Revelation. In Revelation 11 John says, “I was given a reed like a measuring rod and was told, ‘Go and measure the temple of God and the altar, and count the worshipers there. But exclude the outer court; do not measure it, because it has been given to the Gentiles.
They will trample on the holy city for 42 months’” (vv. 1–2). In context, Jesus has sent his angel “to show his servants what must soon take place.” Thus, the prophecy concerns a future event, not one that took place twenty-five years earlier.n summary, among the reasons we can be certain that the book of Revelation was not written twenty-five years after the destruction of Jerusalem, three tower above the rest.
First, just as it is unreasonable to suppose that someone writing a history of the World Trade Center in the aftermath of September 11, 2001, would fail to mention the destruction of the twin towers, so too it stretches credulity to suggest that Revelation was written in the aftermath of the devastation of Jerusalem and the Jewish temple and yet makes no mention of this apocalypse.
Additionally, if John is writing in AD 95, it is incredible to suppose he would not mention the fulfillment of Christ’s most improbable and apocalyptic vision. Finally, New Testament documents—including the book of Revelation— speak of Jerusalem and the Jewish temple intact at the time they were written.
If Revelation was written before AD 70, it is reasonable to assume that the vision given to John was meant to reveal the apocalyptic events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem—events that were still in John’s future but are in our past. This, of course, does not presuppose that all the prophecies in Revelation have already been fulfilled. Just as thoughtful Christians should distance themselves from the fully futurist fallacy, they should disavow a predominantly preterist (i.e., past) perspective.