Hell's a little fuller

[vernecarty]

It seems clear in Rev14:9-11 that anyone who recieves the mark will drink of the wine of the wrath of God that is poured out with-out measure into the cup of his indignation.

Arguably the most terrifying verse in the Bible.
Every person who has lived to draw breath as a sinful new-born does so by virtue of God's prevailing mercy.
People who accept the mark of the beast are destined to experience the unmitigated fullness of the wrath of Deity - something impossible for us to even imagine.
In fact, the Bible explicitly states that that some are indeed fitted for Divine wrath.
On the one hand my heart breaks at the prospect of any human having to experience this.  
On the other hand, who am I to argue with the Almighty?
To God alone be the glory.

So I think the ones who'll be saved in the trib period are ones who realize Jesus is the Messiah and believe and refuse the mark, therefore they should be killed Rev 13:15-17. So how do the Jews get through the 3.5 year period, with-out taking the mark, or do only some of them take it? or maybe they are just getting the enforcement underway, when they realize the Truth.

Many will not.  It seems that everyone will face the choice.
Considering how big this world is, if the Biblical meaning is, as I believe it is, that every single person still alive during the great tribulation will have to render a decision, clearly there are going to be dramatic changes in the progress of space-time to bring each soul to a place of being faced with the choice of worshipping the beast. There will literally be no space-time in which a person can hide!
 We probably won't be around to witness these events...
Verne

[vernecarty]

You are suggesting then that the robbers are Israel's enemies, and not Jewish people? What vision, then, are Israel's enemies aware of that they trying to establish? The antichrist?

Moonflower

Not necessarily. The nation ususally follows its leadership, both political and spiritual, down a path of destruction. Some scholars believe that the anti-Christ will be Jewish. It seems highly improbable that Israel would ever accept him as Messiah otherwise.
 

Can people be saved that have recieved the mark? or have they eternally dammed their souls? There's a verse in revelation that suggests if you take the mark you've really sold your soul. Yet in Joel it says whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Interesting question.
I do not believe they can.
the implication is of course that there are certain things that you could do which would preclude your being able to call on the name of the Lord in the sense Joel means.
There are places in Scirpture where God specifically says that some will call to Him but He will refuse to answer them.
Do not forget that the concept of eternity includes not only the infinite future, but also the infinite "past"!
Ask yourself the question - when did God first think of you?

Some will object on the basis of time's (more precisely  space-time) having a "beginning" but that is another topic.  
Your use of the expression "eternally damned their souls" is packed more full of theology than you probably realise!  
People who accept the mark of the beast fall into an extremely rare category of individuals described in the Scripture.
From what is said about this select category, one has to conclude that for them there will be no salvation.
The group includes:
Angels that sinned, Judas the son of perdition, those who blaspheme the Holy Spirit, (and no, I do not know what this means!) false prophets/teachers, and those receiving the mark of the beast and worshipping him....
I cannot think of any greater demonstration of God's remarkable mercies than that none of us who are saved can ever fall into such a frightful category...God is good!

Verne

Is this Calvinistic thought?   I think that GG preached that it was possible for us as saved individuals to take the mark of the beast, meaning that there are probably other Christians who teach that, too?

Moonflower

George Geftakys was an evil man Moonflower. Place absolutely no stock in any thing he taught you. It is safer that way sister.
It so happens on this particular point he was engaging in his usual practice of manipulating the emotions of his hearers to suit  his own purpose. Neither life nor death can separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord. This is fundamental - the security of the believer.
I am now personally convinced that those who do not accept this truth are not truly saved. Radical? So be it. That is my position.
Verne

[al Hartman]

The nation (Israel) ususally follows its leadership, both political and spiritual, down a path of destruction. Some scholars believe that the anti-Christ will be Jewish. It seems highly improbably that Israel would ever accept him as Messiah otherwise.
 

     Bear in mind that, unlike in the days of Christ, relatively few Jews today think of the Messiah in terms of an actual person.  Jesus' 33 years on earth, and especially the manner of His departure, marked the beginning of an even greater blindness to the things of God on the part of Israel's seed.  

     Nowadays, the average Jew thinks of the Messiah only as a concept, if at all.  For this reason, the Jewish leadership might readily accept as "messiah" anyone with an agenda which seems to bring Israel into its own, as they view it.

   I think that GG preached that it was possible for us as saved individuals to take the mark of the beast, meaning that there are probably other Christians who teach that, too?

Moonflower

     There are "other christians," i.e. nominally christian groups, sects, denominations, etc. that teach almost anything imaginable.  Our only protections against such error are the Lordship of Jesus Christ in our lives, the certainty of His promises, and the guidance of God's Holy Spirit.  There is absolutely nothing we can do to save ourselves from deception.  Thanks be to God, the grace He has extended to us in and through His Son is more than adequate for the task!  Trust fully in Him.

Blessings abound where e'er He reigns,
al

[vernecarty]

     Bear in mind that, unlike in the days of Christ, relatively few Jews today think of the Messiah in terms of an actual person.  Jesus' 33 years on earth, and especially the manner of His departure, marked the beginning of an even greater blindness to the things of God on the part of Israel's seed.  

     Nowadays, the average Jew thinks of the Messiah only as a concept, if at all.  For this reason, the Jewish leadership might readily accept as "messiah" anyone with an agenda which seems to bring Israel into its own, as they view it.

While there have indeed been some changes in Jewish culture, a lessening of their sense of national identity is not one of them. The anti-christ will have to have both political and religious (spiritual) credibility. There is no concievable scenario under which orthodox Jews (and they are the ones who will control the religous agenda,  as they did during Christ's earthly sojourn) would ever accept a non-Jew as Messiah  in any capacity!, IMHO.
But you do make an interesting point about what will indeed be a prevailing spirit of accomodation...

Verne

[moonflower2]

You are suggesting then that the robbers are Israel's enemies, and not Jewish people? What vision, then, are Israel's enemies aware of that they trying to establish? The antichrist?

Moonflower

Not necessarily. The nation ususally follows its leadership, both political and spiritual, down a path of destruction. Some scholars believe that the anti-Christ will be Jewish. It seems highly improbable that Israel would ever accept him as Messiah otherwise.
 

Maybe I missed something, but I don't remember reading that Israel was going to recognize the antichrist as their Messiah. I thought they were going to make a pact with someone, midtrib, who will promise them peace, but they won't recognize him as the antichrist until he places himself in the temple to be worshipped. I assumed that because he was promising them peace, that he was an outsider who is and will be causing unrest and war with Israel.

Moonflower

[editor]

Maybe I missed something, but I don't remember reading that Israel was going to recognize the antichrist as their Messiah. I thought they were going to make a pact with someone, midtrib, who will promise them peace, but they won't recognize him as the antichrist until he places himself in the temple to be worshipped. I assumed that because he was promising them peace, that he was an outsider who is and will be causing unrest and war with Israel.

Moonflower

No one has this stuff all figured out, including me.  However, it is my understanding that a large majority of current teachers believe that it is AFTER he sets himself up in the temple, that the Jews KNOW he is NOT the messiah.

I am not sure if the Jews accept him as messiah, but certainly he will have the ideas, charisma and practical solutions to so many problems that the entire world will view him as a savior of one sort or another.  I am sure the Jews will too, but am unclear as to whether they will see him as Christ.

The point that has always bothered me is that all this is marked by the "peace process."  I am happier when Israel is at war, defeating her enemies, not when she is signing a peace accord.

Brent

[Joe Sperling]

I have read several books concerning Revelation and the Antichrist. Most of the writers feel that Israel will be deceived by "the Beast" and receive him as their Messiah. "Who is like unto the beast?" everyone will be saying. For 3-1/2 years he will appear to be a miracle worker, but then he will reveal who he really is and set up an idol of himself in the Temple and seek worship.

Almost every writer believes that the AntiChrist will have to be a Jew for Israel to receive him as their Messiah. "Me you will not receive, but if another come in his own name, him you will receive" Jesus said. One really interesting thing that several authors(including Arthur W. Pink) have surmised is that the AntiChrist will be Judas Iscariot returned to earth. Jesus calls Judas "The son of perdition" when he says "None of these have I lost save the son of Perdition, that he might go to his own place". It's interesting that Jesus says that Judas went to "his own place" and says that the antichrist will come in "his own name". Judas is the only person labeled the "Son of Perdition", and Paul calls the antichrist the "son of perdition" who will be revealed after the rapture.

Jesus also said "have I not chosen you all, and one of you is a devil?" It is just conjecture, but could it have been possible that the Son of God and the Son of the devil(the son of perdition) were on earth at the same time? One died on the cross("cursed is he who hangeth on a tree") and was cursed for us in the most giving act of all time, the other committing suicide on a tree, after having committing the most selfish act of all time(betraying the Son of God for 30 pieces of silver)?

One ascended to heaven, the other descended back to "his own place" in perdition. One to come back on a white horse, the other to ascend once again from perdition to become the Antichrist(Revelation says the antichrist "once was, is not, yet is" and ascends from the bottomless pit.

None of this is really all that important, but I thought I'd share it because it has always intrigued me.

--Joe

[vernecarty]

One really interesting thing that several authors(including Arthur W. Pink) have surmised is that the AntiChrist will be Judas Iscariot returned to earth. Jesus calls Judas "The son of perdition" when he says "None of these have I lost save the son of Perdition, that he might go to his own place". It's interesting that Jesus says that Judas went to "his own place" and says that the antichrist will come in "his own name". Judas is the only person labeled the "Son of Perdition", and Paul calls the antichrist the "son of perdition" who will be revealed after the rapture.

Jesus also said "have I not chosen you all, and one of you is a devil?" It is just conjecture, but could it have been possible that the Son of God and the Son of the devil(the son of perdition) were on earth at the same time? One died on the cross("cursed is he who hangeth on a tree") and was cursed for us in the most giving act of all time, the other committing suicide on a tree, after having committing the most selfish act of all time(betraying the Son of God for 30 pieces of silver)?

One ascended to heaven, the other descended back to "his own place" in perdition. One to come back on a white horse, the other to ascend once again from perdition to become the Antichrist(Revelation says the antichrist "once was, is not, yet is" and ascends from the bottomless pit.

None of this is really all that important, but I thought I'd share it because it has always intrigued me.

--Joe

Joe this is absolutely fascinating!
Judas Iscariot has always been a real theological thorn for me.
Notwithstanding the fact that I am a full-blown five-point Calvinist   Christ's ucmpromising statement that it would have been better for Judas never to have been born has always been deeply perplexing.
Despite the trouble so many have with the Cavinist view of predestination, here is one clear and uminstakable reference by the Lord himself to Judas' inevitable fate.
What you have suggested about who Judas could be opens up a whole new universe of thought on this and I find it incredibly interesting. It is causing me to rethink the whole matter of the message behind the wheat and the tares. One has to wonder if there are many sown by the enemy!
Man... this really gives me the creeps..! stop scaring me dude...
Verne

[moonflower2]

....Judas is the only person labeled the "Son of Perdition", and Paul calls the antichrist the "son of perdition" who will be revealed after the rapture....

...Revelation says the antichrist "once was, is not, yet is" and ascends from the bottomless pit....

--Joe

That is interesting.

Isn't the antichrist also healed of a "deadly wound"?

Moonflower

[al Hartman]

    ...I am a full-blown five-point Calvinist...  

Man... this really gives me the creeps..! stop scaring me dude...
Verne

     OK, Verne, now you've gone and piqued my curiosity:  What, exactly, does a "full-blown five-point Calvinist" have to be scared about?      

al

[sfortescue]

I am still wondering about Daniel 11 and who is being referred to as the "robbers of your people" or the "violent ones of your people" in verse 14.

Can anyone else give some of your suggestions as to who this may be referring to? I am just curious and want to know.

Moonflower

J. Vernon McGee gives the interpretation that I've most often heard for Daniel 11.  Verses 6 through 17 cover the time period of about 250 B.C. through 195 B.C.  Israel was caught in the middle of warfare between descendants of two of the four generals of Alexander the Great, Seleucus in Syria and Ptolemy in Egypt.  After verse 35 the prophecy leaps forward to the coming of the Antichrist.

[Joe Sperling]

Moonflower----

Again, it's all conjecture, but some of the author's I've read think that when the Anti-christ(whoever this leader is) is assassinated(Revelation says he is slain somehow)
that the devil, but most likely "the son of perdition" will then enter and use this man's body. His body will ressurrect to the amazement of all, though inhabited by a spirit from the abyss--this could be why he "was, is not, yet is" all at the same time. It is the son of Satan, Satan himself, and the False Prophet appearing on earth as an unholy trinity of evil. But again, it's all conjecture--but very interesting.

--Joe

[Uh Oh]

When George Geftakys dies, will hell be that much fuller?  How about TIm G?

[al Hartman]

When George Geftakys dies, will hell be that much fuller?  How about TIm G?

     That may depend upon how effectually and fervently we pray for them...

al

[editor]

When George Geftakys dies, will hell be that much fuller?  How about TIm G?

     That may depend upon how effectually and fervently we pray for them...

al

So if George isn't saved, it may turn out to be my fault?

Brent