Georg … I sent you two pm's but both were “delivery failure”

Hi Karmarie,”So you (Selah) and Ed both study numbers but you don't both agree on who the beast is.  Interesting number patterns though.”Karmarie …There are likely MANY things Ed and I do not agree on !!!As an example, Georg and I both believe (know!) that the beast of Revelation is Romanism and its papacy.Georg's post on “The Antichrist” was…[Read more]

Hello Tim,Yes, it is my personal study and findings started about 30 years ago.  What peaked my interest at that time was that the language to number the beast was not stated, and I began to wonder why.I was a futurist for many years, but when I became exposed to the writings of the Reformers and the Reformation saints and martyrs, I became an…[Read more]

Tim Kraft,It is mind boggling how soon a thread can get off topic.I know you had trouble posting your subject (through a computer glitch??) but would you mind starting your own thread with your challenge rather than getting mine off topic?Perhaps you did not receive it, but I PM'd this request to you a few days ago.Thank you.

David,You asked “what of M” regarding the Roman numerals that sum at 666.You also think I left out the M to “make” the sum at 666.David, it is clear that you are unaware that “M” is a much later development.  They wanted to make a sign for 1000, so they placed two “D”s back to back to indicate 1000.Over time, it became easier to write the letter…[Read more]

Georg … “If you want to talk numbers, you have to talk to EdJ”How about talking numbers with you Georg?  Specifically the number of the beast as per Rev 13:18.1.  What language and number system do you believe God intended for His people to solve this mystery?      For this was a main thrust of the question of this thread. Note the orig…[Read more]

To any and all,The question I had asked was whether the evidence presented, all relative to Jesus and 74 was (in their opinion) a coincidence or designed?Was the question to Georg too complex?I am not necessarily asking anyone to answer the question at this time, but rather to determine if they understood what was asked.Did you understand the…[Read more]

Tim,Might you have intended to submit your post to another thread?This one is about “a coincidence or a creation”.Georg,Would you use your spirit of discernment and indicate your opinion to us as to whether what was presented (about Jesus and 74) is merely coincidence or perhaps, a divine design?Thank you.

Georg said:”If you're looking for opinions, you have come to the right side, because that's all you get here.  Now let me ask you a question, do opinions really count?”Apparently so, otherwise why would you have asked for mine?Whose opinion would be more worthy to be counted?John Wesley or … … GCharles Spurgeon or … … GSir Isaac  Newton o…[Read more]

Georg … on your recent post to me, you quoted the (my) opening post in this thread and said:”You might as well have ask; are you Democrat, Republican, or Independent?  Why not come straight out and ask your question, or give us your opinion, on whatever subject that's on you mind?”Are you serious?  You ask why don't I come straight out and ask m…[Read more]

Ed J … you stated:”You” are the one making the direct association of “it” with Catholicism.  I think the association of “the cross” is a much broader issue.”Yes Ed … I am the one making the direct association of 'it' with Catholicism.The “it” I was referring to is the OT passage you supplied … not that the scroll was a cross.There is an…[Read more]

Thank you T8,That was the kind of input I was hoping to hear from the folks at this site.  It is clear that you have knowledge of what is happening at other Christian discussion boards.You had said:”I think there is a lot of merit to the historicist view point, but I also wouldn't be surprised to see a NWO and world leader in the future. Maybe…[Read more]

Georg … please read these posts more carefully.You stated:  “Are you (selah) suggesting the scroll was in the shape of a cross?  Before you quote me saying I believe something, you should be sure that I do.”Again, read the post carefully.  Ed J suggested that Zech may have been referring to a cross … not me.Be careful of who and what you ar…[Read more]

A cross … 20 X 10 cubitsYes Ed … a distinct possibility considering Romanism's sign of the cross on right hand and forehead and the curse mentioned in the Zech text you provided … 5:1-4I had never considered that application and I doubt that Georg would have either.

Thanks for the welcome Ed JYou had noted “I Don't believe my view of God would fall into any of your categories listed here.”You are right.  Our understanding of God is not really a subject of eschatology … at least that I am aware of.But, in that you believe that the Holy City, New Jerusalem or City of God in Revelation is to be spiritually…[Read more]

Thanks WJ,That was a fantastic study your link provided on yachid vs echad.It should cause a problem for some, but apparently it does not.  For them it is just a mystery, not a problem.

Georg,I believe in the scriptures you presented … old and new.Was it not God's promise that He would not destroy the earth again … by water.Regarding your understanding as an historicist, as I had noted, there are variations within each group.When I read Revelation 17 and 18 I get a most definite indication from the scriptures presented that…[Read more]

Hello Gene … thanks for your input.I have two Hebrew/English Bibles.The one translates as you say … The Lord Our God Is One Lord.The other one is the Hebrew Pentateuch, and in Deut 6:4 it states:Here O Israel The Lord Our God Is The One Eternal BeingHowever, it both cases the Hebrew “one” of unity is used … echad.

The silence is deafening!1300 members, 10 days and counting and not one response to my question.Not too encouraging for a newbie's first post.Is this a sacred cow subject?Why would those interested in Bible prophecy be reluctant to state where they stand on these issues?Is it possible that many do not know what position or group they are…[Read more]

Thanks for your reply Kerwin,It would be most interesting for us to know why the other Hebrew word (single unique one) was not used as that would have made the statement under discussion unmistakably clear.I guess we will not know God's reason for that, this side of heaven.