brakelite

At the risk of incurring the wrath of everyone here, I will repeat what I have said many times previously, here and elsewhere. God has given a great deal of information in the Bible that directly and indirectly describes the Antichrist. His nature and character...ambitions...means by which he establishes himself and maintains his authority...who promotes him to such an exalted position as world leader...his duration in two stages and the length of both...in fact, there is no-one referred to as much in scripture apart from Christ Himself. Even Moses maybe mentioned more often, but not in so much detail in descriptive form as is the "man of sin"...the "little horn"...the "Antichrist". Despite all the information available, Christendom is so divided, so confused, it is clear very very few truly understand what on earth they are talking about...and because so many versions of this story/entity exists currently, with more seemingly being invented every day, the obvious truth is that the vast majority are just plain wrong. And to put it bluntly, if you are wrong about who he is, you are going to be wrong about his mark. If you are wrong about his mark, the you will likely receive it....even welcome it.

The left are tolerant. Toleration is the concept of "allowing" something until such time as you disallow it. Toleration always implies permission. The left "tolerates" certain things until such time as they choose that such toleration is not in their best interests. The concept of toleration is worse than intoleration. At least with those who are constantly in opposition to your freedom of speech/protest/worship etc, you know where you are. With those who "tolerate " your freedoms, you never know when they will change their minds. Freedoms such as are described in the constitution, ought never to be "tolerated". Never.

The Father you must admit is a person yes? He has a personality, right?And would that not go for Jesus, the Son, also? Remember, the Bible doesn't actually state there is a trinity. It says Godhead...not necessarily the same. 1 John 1:3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ. So do two people fit into your idea of a 'trinity', and perhaps the third "aspect" you refer to is the Spirit they both share...God IS Spirit, and "for he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him". John 3:34

In answer to the original question; why does God allow Antichrist to rule the world? Read through revelation 13 and you will understand he rules through deception, not force of arms, even to the point when people will clamor for his favors. People are deceived because they have no love for truth. Not just truth as a factual arrangement, but Truth as a principle in the life. Most who contribute to Christian forums are already deceived...looking to the future for someone to enter the political arena with guns blazing and aimed at all things Christian...deceived already. They do not recognize that the Antichrist is already here...has already gathered a large portion of the worlds population into his arms, and it is only a matter of a short time before this portion will become a majority and will call upon this power to rule over them. Every President since Reagan has welcomed and praised this power, and even Trump, despite some initial stand-offishness, has softened his stance and praised him. Very few in this very forum recognize him, despite claiming a sound understanding of prophecy. Like most, deceived.

That's great, and exactly as it should be for all of us. So when Jesus declares His Father as the only true God (John 17:3), informs Mary not to touch Him yet because He has not yet risen to His Father, His God, (John 20:17), and then from heaven declares to the church of Philadelphia that the Father He is referring to is still His own God, (Rev. 3:12), why do you go to extra Biblical origin as introduced to the church by the Gnostic trained Athanasius and teach a three in one God? Don't presume to know what I believe concerning the deity of the Son until you have read other posts of mine elsewhere on the subject. What I am asking in my last post was for people to simply deal with the indisputable fact that Jesus declared the Father as the only true God...His God...even after His ascension. Once we can settle on that without qualifying it, then we can move on to who Jesus is. Fairly heavy stuff here. Sounds similar to the kind of trash talk the Pharisees shot at their own God walking among them. My last question on my last post was "why"...why do we speak and teach of a trinity when the Bible, upon which we claim we base our faith, clearly states that only the Father is the true God? Here are some more texts showing this.... John 5:18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. Was Jesus claiming a trinity as His Father? 1 Corinthians 15:24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. When this age of sin is finished, and all things are once more in harmony with righteousness, Jesus the Son gives all things once more into the hand of "God, even the Father". He does not hand it to a trinity...to describe the trinity as God makes no sense...to describe the Father as God, and Him alone, harmonizes with all scripture. Ephesians 1:2 Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ. 3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: Ephesians 1:17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him: 2 Corinthians 11:31 The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is blessed for evermore, knoweth that I lie not. Colossians 1:3 We give thanks to God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying always for you. If this is so, then why is it called a "mystery". Mysteries cannot be offered as an explanation for anything. This is as empty as cosmologists declaring that their invention, dark matter, for which they have no definitive information or evidence, is the "mysterious" reason galaxies don't fly apart. A literal Father and Son, operating in concert and love with each other and those who love and know them, is the only explanation in concert with the entire Bible. A metaphorical Father and a metaphorical Son is the only way a trinity can be justified. But a metaphorical Father did not send a metaphorical Son into the world to redeem man. (John 3:16; 1 John 4:9,10; ) If the trinity is true, and the Son the same age as the Father, thus they both only playing the roles of father and son, then the entire story of Abraham and Isaac becomes meaningless. The offering and dedication of the firstborn becomes meaningless. John 3:16 becomes meaningless. When the Bible says God sent His Son into the world to save sinners, then I believe He had a Son to send.

If we truly believed what the Bible says, we would not so quickly assume a trinity. "But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him." 1 Cor. 8:6 Here Paul reveals that there is but one God. Not two, not three, one. One and only one, just as the 'shema' says in the OT, Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one Lord. Paul also reveals who that God is. The Father. Now you must deal with that before asking the inevitable, does that mean that Jesus isn't God? Deal with the indisputable first. Accept that which is clear, plain, and written in both OT and NT, repeated constantly, stressed by every prophet and professed by every Christian, (though they are confused as to what that actually means because of the trinity) before continuing in debate. Even Jesus agrees...." And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." Who was Jesus speaking to here in John 17:3? The Father. His Father. Our Father. And yes, Jesus's God. Revelation 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name. Revelation 14:1 And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father’s name written in their foreheads. Those of us who finally make it to heaven shall have Jesus's Father's name written in their foreheads. As well as Jesus name. This does not mean a tattoo of some sort with literal writing. In our foreheads is our conscience. The Father's name is His character. Exodus 34:5 ¶ And the LORD descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the LORD. 6 And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, 7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and to the fourth generation. So deal with this first. The Father is the only true God...as testified by Jesus Himself. Don't assume a trinity of 3 co-equal co-eternal consub stantial beings making one God until you can come to terms, accept, and believe that indisputable revelation of scripture. Once you accept that, then, and only then, should we begin to discuss the divinity/deity of Christ, and/or the Holy Spirit. Why? Because the trinity as expressed in the creeds, denies the Father as being the ONLY TRUE GOD.

Yes, we do the works of God (if we indeed have the Spirit of Christ in us) every day of the week. Does that however cancel the sanctity and holiness of the Sabbath? Does it negate our obligation as required in the commandment to cease from our own works, as Jesus did from His? As Paul would have done? Can you really imagine Paul continuing with his tent making on Sabbath? Or Peter, James, or John going out on their trawler on Sabbath? You asked why would we be concerned if Jesus worked on Sabbath...it was you who brought it up as a reason for you not to stop work on Sabbath. Jesus's doing the works of His Father became an excuse for you to render the entire observance of the day obsolete. Just as other ones (excuse the pun) use the "rest" we find in Christ an excuse for rendering the entire day obsolete. And these threads are so protracted because it is an important topic. That whether we are or not to render obedience to God's commandments is vital to our salvation. Though our obedience doesn't provide for our salvation, our disobedience certainly affects our relationship with God, just as Adam's disobedience affected his. The thread continues because people are passionate about it. Those who keep Sabbath have very valid reasons for doing so, so also it is believed by those who don't. It does matter. One cannot sit on the fence, thinking it isn't important. Many of course who are of the OSAS camp would claim it makes no difference. But Truth matters. Doctrine matters. Obedience matters. God's commandments matter. The Sabbath matters. And our attitude to the Sabbath matters, even here in NT times, our attitude to the Sabbath matters, because it s a direct reflection of our attitude to God's authority. If God hasn't changed the Sabbath to Sunday...if the church has no real authority to do so...then what is man that he thinks he can make up his own mind on whether he observes the Sabbath or not? Who are we that we should think that our opinions are more authoritative than God's word? There is no real genuine Biblical support for the concept of either Sunday sacredness...new covenant rest in Christ...or for any other replacement/cancellation/annulment/or metamorphism that renders the Sabbath observance obsolete. The many vain attempts to do so by man is the main reason these threads are so long....mans' defensive obstinacy in rebellion against God is and always has been legend.

Having spent many years as part of the Pentecostal movement, and witnessing first hand all the extremes and falsehoods associated with it, I can fully appreciate the above, and thankful that there is such a balanced perspective. I agree that even in false settings, God can still impress true seekers of truth with direction and discernment. The reference in Revelation 13:13 I believe could very well be a false pentecost. The true latter rain will be comprised of miracles and spiritual gifts, yes, but will not be known or identified by them. Rather, the true latter rain, the final outpouring of the Holy Spirit will be identified and recognized by the power of God in using simple humble men and women in lay evangelism...not massive grand crusades where everyone is emotionally stirred, no, but one-on-one preaching that convicts mightily of sin, righteousness, and judgement; a gospel that the church in general rejects; a message that thousands accept with love and fervor, but fall foul of the church leaders in doing so because it doesn't have their official "stamp of approval"; and those preaching this message will be considered 'heretics', classed as 'antichrists', called servants of the devil, and along with those listening and accepting the message,be persecuted and turned away from most churches. The churches that accept such, will eventually be driven underground, or chased into the wilderness. The fact that the modern charismatic movement is so popular, and receives so much attention and praise, is not characteristic of a movement walking in truth. If you want to come closer to identifying a message that has truth, find a church that is generally ridiculed and considered heretic and its members abused and unaccepted by the majority, yet teaches the Bible as the only source of doctrine, but whose teachings do not find favor with the church i general, because it is too painful to part with sin and worldly pleasures.

Satan appearing as the Madi to the Moslem, the Krishna to the Hindu, Jesus to the Christian, extra-terrestrial to the new-age...all things to all people. Speaking eloquently and convincingly to unite the world against the elect..."and ye shall be hated of all nations for My name's sake"... When the false prophet (apostate Protestantism) "causes all to receive" the mark of apostasy (submission to Rome) all nations, kindreds, tongues and people will welcome this as a saving mechanism to all the (erroneously so-called) judgements of God being cast upon the earth in the form of natural disasters, it will be a form of deception that will deceive all except those who understand the true nature and identity of Antichrist. Today, the far majority part of Christendom believes the Antichrist to be a future individual coming in with guns blazing against all things Christian and setting himself up as an object of worship in a future temple on a future Israeli held Mt. Moriah. And this will deceive who? Most are already deceived into believing this theory, a theory dreamed up by the real Antichrist in the 16th century to divert attention away from himself while he quietly and innocently with the approval it seems of all the world continues his work of uniting the nations under his aegis. It has worked. While refusing to recognize him, how can they defend themselves against receiving his mark?

It is our duty to expose error and those that teach it. Eph. 5:6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. 7 Be not ye therefore partakers with them. 8 For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light: 9 (For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;) 10 Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord. 11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them

Just a reminder of the very first question asked to open this now very long discussion.... Jesus has already answered this when He gave the tablets of stone to Moses, which said, quote: Remember the seventh day to keep it holy. We all agree that the seventh day is Saturday, and that Sunday is the first day of the week. So there is no debate on that score. Now, we must ask, is it still a special day to the Lord? John in Revelation said that he was in the spirit on the "Lord's day", so the answer is yes, the Lord still, at least in Johns time, had a day which was set aside for some purpose, presumably for gathering together, or meeting with the Lord in spirit to commune with Him, as John was doing. So, if the Sabbath was the seventh day, and the Lord still had a day, we must then ask, is the Lord's day the seventh day Sabbath? Again, Jesus provided a clear definitive answer. Mark 2:28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath. The Sabbath therefore is the Lord's day. It was on the Sabbath that John had his vision, and was given the book of Revelation by the angel on that day. Not the first day of the week, but the seventh day, Saturday. To dispute otherwise is to contradict scripture: to contradict scripture is to place personal opinion above the word of God. You are making of yourself an authority above God Himself. It is the same with the argument "Jesus is my Sabbath rest". Where is there a "Thus sayeth the Lord" which states that a faith in Christ negates observance of the day? Where is there a "thus sayeth the Lord" which states that a faith in Christ that negates the sanctity and holiness of the Sabbath, the Lord's day? That there is a 'rest' in trusting our lives to our Savior there is no doubt, no dispute. But to claim that such a rest displaces the obligation to obey God is to be quite blunt, ludicrous. It goes beyond scripture, and sets up an alternative religion based on personal preference and mood. The insistent argument by some that because the commandment says, "six days thou shalt do all thy labor, but on the seventh thou shalt do no work", somehow means that because Jesus "worked" the works of His Father on the Sabbath, we can leap to the conclusion that we can earn money by working on the Sabbath in selfish pursuit of gain and an increased bank balance, is also ludicrous. We also can "work" the works of our Father, and Jesus clearly told us what those works were. "It is lawful" He said, "to do well on the Sabbath day". To bless others...to heal...to provide for the poor...to mend the broken-hearted...to set captives free...to visit widows and those in prison...these are 'works' that on the Sabbath are lawful and in no wise means that either Jesus or us are breaking the Sabbath by doing them, nor do they mean that the Sabbath is no longer a commandment. Please note something important to grasp. The Pharisees were legalists of the first order. As Jesus declared, they tithed mint and other herbs, but neglected more important things. What were those more important things? They were described by Jesus as weightier matters of the law. Note well that these matters were still a part of the law! They did not negate the law, but were a obligatory part of the same law!! And what were they? judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. Matt. 23:23 Those things I listed above as being lawful to do on the Sabbath day, things which Jesus Himself did and described as the "works of His Father", could they be described as "weightier matters of the law? Are they works of judgment, mercy, and faith? Absolutely they are!!! So do they negate the keeping of the Sabbath? NO! They are fully a part of Sabbath keeping, and that was Jesus whole purpose in doing them! He was demonstrating that doing good on the Sabbath day was an integral part of observing Sabbath! This was in direct contradiction to the wrongful teachings of the Pharisees, who condemned Jesus for doing good. To use such arguments as an excuse to dispose of the Sabbath altogether is a monstrous distortion of Jesus own motives in doing good. He wasn't healing in order to prove the Sabbath is no longer valid, He was healing because He loves people and was being merciful to their needs...a fully appropriate activity to do any day of the week, including Sabbath. To argue otherwise is to agree with the Pharisees. "You can heal any day of the week, except for the Sabbath". Yeah? Really? That somehow healing someone on the Sabbath is a desecration of that day? Jesus came to show mercy. Was He to stop being Jesus on the Sabbath in order to accomplish His mission? In order to accomplish His mission in revealing God's character to mankind, was He to disobey one of His own commandments? Did God set aside one of His commandments (or any of His commandments) in order for us to better accomplish our purpose in being a light to our fellow man? Matthew 5:16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven. Did God remove the Sabbath so that we could do His works every day of the week without breaking the Sabbath? Think carefully.

Where in scripture is there a reference to "breaking the Sabbath?" You can break a commandment, sure. But break a day? So are you saying that Jesus admitted to breaking His own commandment that He wrote on stone with His own finger, but punished Israel for doing the same? The only breaking Jesus did was to break the Sabbath free from the over zealous legalistic burdens that had been placed upon it by self righteous hypocrites who considered themselves paragons of virtue and the epitome of wisdom. They accused Jesus of sin, Jesus admitted of no such thing. They considered healing cripples and blind people an unholy practice originating from the devil. Jesus asked them however which of them would refuse to haul out a sheep that got caught in a ditch...no-one dared answer, but you and I know that not one of them would allow a poor animal to suffer, yet they protested when Jesus healed anyone on the Sabbath. "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath day?" He asked. What was His answer? What kind of "work" ws Jesus performing on the Sabbath? What kind of work was His Father performing through Jesus on the Sabbath? Jesus gives you the answer. "It is lawful to do well on the Sabbath days". Do you really believe Jesus would approve of your using His healing acts on Sabbath and claiming they are akin to common labor? You are doing exactly what the Pharisees were doing. They, in order to trap Him, you in order to excuse yourself from obeying.

Babylon the Great, Mother of harlots, will be comprised of all faiths...all shall retain their own unique character, such as the gods and idols, but they will submit themselves to one leader...the Pope. Roman Catholicism has for centuries accepted pagan/tainted/compromised sects so long as they surrender their sovereignty and are willing to compromise on a few vital doctrines of Rome...Sunday sacredness, and the trinity for example, would be quit acceptable to nearly all other faiths...they already have trinity versions which can be easily adapted to suit...and even the Jews would be happy to have Sundays off...they would gladly accept a time when they may spend time with family and leisure as their Sabbaths are as committed as their business days. Same I think with Islamists...they needn't give up Friday.

When Jesus met the demoniac among the gravestones I can imagine all the disciples hightailing it outa there and leaving Jesus standing on His own. So what happened? The Word was spoken and the man freed. Sat down right there and then and in his right mind. Doesn't mean however he never sinned again, but he certainly got off to a good start. So what would Jesus have recommended to him in order to keep from sinning? "Abide in the vine". The branch cannot bear fruit in its own power...nor can we stop sinning in our own power. But by beholding we become changed...by abiding we bear fruit...by reading, believing, the word of God our minds take on the character of Christ. Eph. 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; 26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, 27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. John 17:17 ¶ Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life As Mary believed the word of the angel and her faith immediately brought forth the life of the Son of God, so also does our belief, our trust in, our acceptance of, the promises of God in His word, bring holiness, purity, and righteousness to the believer. Victory over self is our battle, victory over sin is the Lord's battle. Our work is to discipline ourselves to read the word, prayer,and witness. The results of these activities, victory over sin, power to walk the walk, ad souls saved for the kingdom, are God's responsibility. Ephesians 1:15 ¶ Wherefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus, and love unto all the saints, 16 Cease not to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers; 17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him: 18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, 19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, 20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places.... 3:20 Now unto him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us, 21 Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen. We so underestimate not only the (re-creative) power of God , but also His willingness to do for us what things without Him we find impossible.

You didn't bother to read the accompanying text?

I have 4 questions. 1. What kind of work was it that Jesus was doing? (See Matt.12:12) 2. For what reason do you think that Jesus described Himself as Lord of the Sabbath? (See Genesis 2:1-3) 3. Why was it that the old covenant was found faulty? (See Hebrews 8:7-9) 4. What commandments are they, what law is it, and why, that God promises to write on the hearts of those who take a hold of the new covenant? (See Exodus 25:8,21,22....... Psalm 40:8......2 Cor. 3:2,3; 6:16.......Hebrews 10:1-29).....and what is the result?......(See Romans 8:29....Romans 6:19-23....Ephesians 2...compare Eph.2:22 with Exodus 25:8, and therein you shall find the purpose of God for your life, and why keeping God's commandments are so important.)

Precisely.

Sin is transgression against the law (1John3:4)...are you suggesting Jesus sinned? Wisdom is required to discern the type of work He was doing. And I think you are fully aware of the difference already, but have brought it up because you are bereft of any arguments that are sustainable in the light of scripture. Like this straw-man argument that I listed among the useless objections to Sabbath keeping previously. You correctly say that keeping the commandments does not gain us eternal life....please quote anyone on a thread anywhere on this forum that claim otherwise...have I said that keeping Sabbath gets me to heaven? Has anyone else said that? No. Straw-man argument. And you are essentially wrong in your statement, that there are new commandments that if obeyed will grant us eternal life. The ONLY thing that grants us eternal life is the cross. ANY commandments keeping is an act of love in appreciation of what God has done in justifying us through the blood of the Lamb. Like I said, a fruit of our knowing Him. A result of our relationship, whether so-called NC commandments or old. And BTW, where does any scripture say that the new covenant commandments replace the old covenant commandments? Could they not be in addition to?

Empires are made up of people...like Babylon the Great...why else would God be calling His people out of her that they be not partakers of her punishment?

He commands us to follow Him, and He kept the law; our law keeping is a direct result of ur knowing Him...a fruit of righteousness, 2 Corinthians 9:10 Now he that ministereth seed to the sower both minister bread for your food, and multiply your seed sown, and increase the fruits of your righteousness;) Philippians 1:11 Being filled with the fruits of righteousness, which are by Jesus Christ, unto the glory and praise of God. Romans 6:22 But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.

Understanding prophetic symbolism 101... Beast=empire/kingdom/nation. How do we know this? Daniel 7:3 And four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse one from another. 4 The first was like a lion, and had eagle’s wings:…. Here is the first beast representing the first of 4 world empires, Babylon, as also revealed as the head of gold in Daniel 2. The other world empires agreed to by most Bible scholars were Medo-Periisa, Greece, and Rome. A very sound principle when interpreting scripture, is to take all scripture language literally, unless there exists some good reason for supposing it to be figurative; and all that is figurative is to be interpreted by that which is literal. That the language here is symbolic is evident when considering verse 17 These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth. That the intention is to show kingdoms and not just individual kings is also evident by the appearance of beasts. Much as modern nations do today, U.S. the eagle; Russia the bear; N.Z. the Kiwi; Aust. the wallaby.etc. Verses 38 and 39 reveal that the first kingdom is Babylon, which rose to power through war and conquest. When Daniel mentioned in verse 2 the four winds of the heaven strove upon the great sea, this is symbolic language representing war and strife amongst nations. (Rev.17:15; Isaiah 17:12,13; Jer. 51:1; Jer. 25:32,33.) Not just one king is represented by the head of Gold...clearly by the time the Medes and Persians defeated Babylon, several kings had ruled over the empire, and there were also several different kings that ruled over Medea Persia, the first being Medes, and the Persian kings rising up more powerfully after. The point being though that God is consistent in His dealngs with us, and once a symbol is estabished, he cleaves to it that we may not become confused over the meaning. God does want us to understand, that is why He gives us prophecy in the first place...and He doesn't change the rules half way through the game. Thus if beasts are kingdoms in the OT, they are kingdoms in the NT. So the first beast of Revelation 13 is a kingdom, in fact a composite kingdom made up of the remnant of the original 4 as expressed in its description, and the second beast of Revel 13 is also a nation...a nation that raises up an image of the first nation. Thus it becomes or evolves into a copy of the orignal kingdom. Starting out like a lamb, it changes as it raises the image, and speaks as a dragon. The second beast, known as the 'false prophet', leads the world in submission to the first beast...a submission to its religious agenda and political tyranny. The mark is a mark of that kingdom...a mark or seal (used interchangably in scripture) that is a recognition on the part of the individual to that kingdom's sovereignty over his life, both political and spiritual. That first kingdom is the Antichrist power. The second kingdom creates a carbon copy of it. The first kingdom is the Vatican/RCC. which becomes a part of a world wide global conglomerate known as Babylon the Great, Mother of Harlots. The comes about after the second kingdom/nation, an apostate Protestant America joins ecumenically with the first beast (thus becoming like her...an image...and leading the world after her, causing all to receive her mark, and of course having the pwer to force all to do so under fiscal obligations and coercive bribery.

You quoted two commandments from the OT. , Deut. 6:5 and Levit. 19:18 . Jesus said of these two commandments, Matthew 22:40 "On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." Seems to me that everything is connected. To my mind if you start throwing stuff out without good reason, you are dismantling something God Himself put together. Now I have heard most of the reasons under the sun as to why Christians do not have to observe the Sabbath. I listed many of them above. I fail to see any of them strong enough to convince me to tear a commandment out of the ten, particularly the one commandment that God has especially magnified as being the very one that sets people apart for Him. You see, anyone in the world could obey the other nine commandments, and someone unfamiliar with religion would never guess the identity of the God who wrote them. Baal could have written those 9 commandments, a log of wood set up by my next door neighbor could be given credit for it. But the 4 th commandment? The 4th commandment set Israel aside from every pagan idol worshiping nation around about them. The pagans had idols of various sorts. The Jewish people were blessed with something unique and very special. It was something which God intended they share with gentiles, for God always intended that all peoples should know Him. The pagan nations around Israel had their fertility rites, their initiations, their icons, their statues and idols. But Israel had a day. This day set them apart. But rather than share the Sabbath with others, Israel repeatedly ignored, neglected, or polluted it by introducing pagan practices into their religion. By the time of Christ they had moved to the other extreme and burdened the Sabbath with so many added laws and regulations the day had become a curse rather than a blessing. Jesus came to reveal how the Sabbath was intended to be kept and to free it from the encumbrances of legalism. To heal on the Sabbath was scandalous to the rabbis. They accused Jesus of breaking the Sabbath, and because Jesus had such huge support and influence, it was partly through fear that the whole nation would begin ‘desecrating’ the Sabbath and of the subsequent judgments of God that the leaders of the nation sought to kill Him, “But a certain one of them, Caiaphas, being high priest that year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all nor do ye take account that it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.” John 11:49,50, and that finally led to His crucifixion. Jesus had numerous opportunities to speak of how the Sabbath was going to be changed or done away with. But rather than do this, all His debates and arguments with the rabbis were focused on how the Sabbath was to be kept. He defied the human traditions and yes, Jesus did break the Sabbath, He broke it free from the rigid guidelines that made it a burden, and a rigid formality. Christians were worshiping alongside Jews in the synagogues every Sabbath, but over a period of time Jews became less tolerant of this arrangement and the rabbis actually devised prayers that were to be said which exposed the Christians within the community. This made it very uncomfortable for Christians to continue meeting in the synagogues, but they did not forsake the Sabbath. They began to meet in their houses and in places like the riversides as Paul found in Thyatira. Eventually, Christians found it impossible to worship in the synagogues and about that same time found themselves questioning their connections to the Jews, and with good reason. Much conflict around the early second century between the Jews and Rome began to impact the church. Not wanting to be recognized by Rome as being sympathetic or in any way involved with the Jews, some Christians began to abandon the Sabbath in favour of Sunday, which became an attractive alternative. At this time also Sun worship increased in popularity with Rome. Mithra was particularly popular with the military, and Sunday became increasingly significant throughout the empire. Constantine established the first Sunday law in 321ad, and the church of Rome adopted that day as its own. As late as the 5th century however there were still a majority of Christian churches that were still observing the Sabbath. The church leaders in Rome strongly encouraged resting on Sunday in accordance to the law, while at the same time imposing fasts and other strictures on the Sabbath. Councils such as that of Laodicea in the mid 4th century recognized the continuing popularity of the Sabbath observance, and instituted canons to further enforce Sunday and demote the Sabbath. Churches that abandioned the Sabbath altogether however were very much in the minority, as attested to by Socrates scholasticus when he wrote in the 4th century “ For although almost all churches throughout the world celebrate the sacred mysteries on the Sabbath every week, yet the Christians of Alexandria and Rome, on account of some ancient tradition, have ceased to do this.” Despite theological arguments, anti-jewish prejudice, and empirical decrees, the Sabbath was still honoured well into the 5th century. It was not dead. In fact, the Sabbath issue became a greatly heated debate between popes and patriarchs throughout the ensuing centuries, and became a test of authority. Sunday became the sign of submission to papal authority, and was a major cause of the great rift within the Christian faith that remained for 900 years. With that history in mind, let us forever lay to rest the idea that Jesus or the apostles, or the scriptures themselves for that matter, had anything to do with any change or annulment of the seventh day Sabbath. Let us, at least in this matter, agree with the Church of Rome that responsibility for such a change can be laid squarely upon her shoulders. For it was the leaders, the popes, cardinals and bishops of that church who down through the ages from the 3rd century to the present day deliberately exalted Sunday and erroneously named that day the Lord’s Day; meanwhile persecuting Sabbath keepers, labeling them, among other things as Judaisers and heretics, and have trampled upon the true Lord’s day and cast it aside. It remains for the Christian today to “choose this day whom ye will serve”. It is for you friend to decide upon whose authority your faith is surrendered to. The Creator of the “heavens, and the earth, and the sea, and all that in them is”, or the prelates and lawmakers of the Catholic church, the foster parents of the counterfeit day of rest and worship, the day of the Sun.

We all know and agree with that...it is a straw-man argument. Obedience we all agree does not bring salvation....but if you think that disobedience does not affect salvation have a talk with Adam. Then ask Jesus why He had to die. Was it not for disobedience? And you think it can be perpetuated?

If you are suggesting that the 'rest' spoken of here in Heb. 4:9-11 replaces the observance of the Sabbath in particular, I think you need to look at the issue from a different perspective. During the period of the forty years’ sojourn in the wilderness, the children of Israel did very generally violate the Sabbath. Ezekiel has given us much information on this point. It even appears that while Moses was in the mount during the first forty days, Israel did then greatly pollute the Sabbath. It was one of the sins for which they came so near being shut out of the promised land at that time. Ezekiel 20:9-13. But God gave them a second probation, or rather prolonged their existing probation, but it was, for all that, a failure. So he lifted up his hand in the wilderness and solemnly swore that they should not enter the land. See Numbers 14:28, 29; Ezekiel 20:15. And here is the reason for this oath, as stated by Ezekiel in the next verse: “Because they despised my judgments, and walked not in my statutes, but polluted my Sabbaths: for their heart went after their idols.” When, therefore, Paul wrote to the Hebrew people, who were converts to Christ, the descendants of these very persons who thus failed to enter the promised land because of their violation of the law of God in general, and of the Sabbath in particular, how significant to them must have been his solemn exhortation, Hebrews 4:11: “Let us labor therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.” Their unbelief showed itself in acts of direct and positive disobedience to God’s commandments, and in especial manner to his Sabbath. Against their evil example Paul solemnly warns all who would lay a hold of the name Christian, Jew or not. Thus to truly enter God's rest, whether Jew or Gentile, obedience is an essential component. The prophet Isaiah has given us a glorious view of the future kingdom of God. When the second Adam shall, with the family of the redeemed, possess the new earth, then shall the immortal saints assemble from the whole face of the earth, on each successive Sabbath, to worship before the Lord of hosts. Isaiah 66:22, 23. And Paul tells us of this final rest of the redeemed, that there remains a Sabbatismos, i.e., as the margin has it, “a keeping of the Sabbath,” to the people of God. Hebrews 4:9. The Sabbath was made for man in Eden. It has survived the dreadful deluge of sin that has almost drowned out piety and truth in the earth. It exists to-day as the subject of promise and of prophecy. It stands firm as the pillars of Heaven, and is established in the immutable authority of God’s unchanging law. And when an end is made of sin, and none but holy beings remain to possess the immortal inheritance, the Sabbath made for man shall still exist, and “All flesh shall keep it with one heart.”

If Jesus doesn't want us as Christians to keep the Sabbath day holy, what then is the alternative for that day? Because it was Jesus that made the day holy in the beginning. The commandment doesn't say that we are to be holy, but that we keep the day holy. And no-where is it mentioned in scripture that the day has been made "unholy" by God...thus the day is still sanctified...set apart...a holy day. It is still sacred...not because we make it so by our observance, but because the Creator made it so before the fall of Adam. Sin did not affect it...the fall did not affect it...and when God made a people to follow Him, His requirement for His people was that they keep it holy. That hasn't changed. Christians are God's people. The law hasn't been abrogated or altered, except in the minds of some that reject any obligation to obey it. It is true that we are to live holy lives 24/7/365 days of the year. Keeping Sabbath isn't about us being holy one day a week like you suggest above...it is about keeping the day holy. It's about the day, not us. If we choose not to obey the commandment....if we decide that the Sabbath is no longer to be observed, and claim we are permitted to do what we like on that day, then we desecrate the day, and by desecrating the day, we offend the one that made it sacred in the beginning. Concerning your second paragraph, I do agree in part; that without the aid of the Holy Spirit in us we can do nothing. But I would ask, to what purpose? Is it not as you said, to live holy lives? So how can anyone live a holy life if it does not incorporate obedience to God's commandments, including the 4th?