I fully agree.
The monetary system is not the mark of the beast. But it will be used in some way to enforce the mark of the beast.

As long as retail still accepts cash, it seems it would prolong or at least weaken the crack down. That's why prolonging the cash flow may be a good idea.

The scholarly evidence is pretty strong that John wrote the book of Revelation during the reign of Domitian, around 96 A.D.

1. References to the book by Church writers in early Christian centuries were pretty unanimous that is written during this time.

2. There's really no mention of Palestine, or Jerusalem. Except in a metaphorical way. The references to a temple are all IN HEAVEN. None of the letters were written to churches in Palestine -- so it appears that the transition had been fully made from the earthly temple and earthly Jerusalem as the "headquarters" of Christianity -- to other centers, and to focusing on Christ in the heavenly realms.

3. The state of the churches fit better to a later era.
For example Laodicea, had experience a devastating earthquake in the 60 AD, but in the letter it is rich and increased with goods - a state it could easily reach in 30 some years.

Worse than I had thought.

I had not considered the point of the vision was the location of the one having the vision.

But let's see what you actually said.

The topic of your comment was the beast, right?
James: The beast arrives at the shore.

Me: It is not mentioned in the text.

However, now that I understand that you think the one having the vision has to do with the vision, I can see what you said next, you thought had something to do with it.

James: So it is coming towards this particular land;

But if where John is standing is presumed to be part of the vision, then John must have something to do with it, and the beast never reaches there.

Besides, as was asked you, why does sand mean Jerusalem?



When did John have this vision?

Was it after Jesus said about Jerusalem, "Mt 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate"? Did Jesus still consider them "saints" at that time? Would you consider Jerusalem, as a whole, "the saints", after they killed their Savior? Would you consider they "knew" Him?

Was it after Paul said, "Ga 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus"?



Was John's vision after the Messiah was cut off?
Do you think that John, having a vision after this time, believed the 42 months would start before that point in history?

"It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation. All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." Rev. 13:7-8

Would it not be reasonable to conclude the "saints" are those whose names have been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world."

Are you aware of U.S. Civil Forfeiture laws? Carrying any amount of cash is not safe if you are stopped by police and they find it. They can take it and keep it for no real reason, no due process. And getting it back is not easy.

Absolutely riveting conversation here, James...

Kland, when we understand the line of interpretation a person is following, then what they are saying starts making a bit more sense.
For example -- most Adventists interpret Daniel and Revelation following the historicist method. That is -- the prophecies cover huge amount of time -- from the prophets day clear to the restoration of all things.

James' approach, on the other hand, is to interpret these prophecies in the preterits method. That method tends to see the prophecies pertaining mainly to the Jewish people, with the major "endpoint" being the destruction of their city and temple in 70 A.D.

Thus they try very hard to prove that Revelation was written prior to 70 A.D. as a warning of the great destruction of Jerusalem, though evidence is strongly against such an early writing of the book.

Anyhow -- many following that method of interpretation see the 42 months as the time Christians fled from Jerusalem around the time of the Feast of Tabernacles in A.D. 66 when Cestius arrived outside of Jerusalem with the 12th Legion, led a brief assault and then abruptly departed. Christains flee into the "wilderness" In A.D. 70 the Romans returned to the city with a much larger army at the time of the Passover of that year–1,260 days or 42 months later.

Though I haven't studied into forfeiture laws that much, I am aware they exist. Basically, the "door" is put in place, so not only your cash, but even your access to your own funds in the bank can be confiscated.
It's just another sign the noose is being strengthened and tightened, so when the crises hits, everything will be in place to tighten that noose.

I would think they'd be hard pressed to explain the rest of the chapter. How do they explain the head healed after receiving the deadly wound? Did all the world "worship" Rome, Vespasian, or his son Titus? What do they make of the other beast coming up out of the earth? What do they say was the image of the beast that the second beast made everyone to worship?

I fully agree with you.
I have found the preterits method of interpretation pretty fanciful and strange.
Also - there are different levels of preterit interpretations, so if I tell you how the preterit interpretations explain your questions in a certain way, it does not mean James has accepted that part of their interpretation -- I'm sure he will speak for himself.

How do they explain the head healed after receiving the deadly wound?

Taken from the Preterit writings:
"The seven heads of the sea monster represent the seven Caesars of Rome and its body represents the Roman citizenry."

"The seven Caesars begin with the first, Julius Caesar. The head of the beast that had a fatal wound in Revelation 13:3 is the sixth head of the beast and the sixth Caesar, Nero, who committed suicide by stabbing himself in the neck. After Nero’s death, the Roman Empire collapsed into civil war. Peace and order was not restored until the rise of the Flavian Dynasty one year later. Therefore, the Flavian Dynasty beginning with Caesar Vespasian is the beast whose wound had been healed in Revelation 13:3."



The second beast of Rev. 13 Represents the army that destroys Israel.
Arises from the earth

"The word earth often just represents the people of a particular city or kingdom, , ,while sea represents the nations foreign to it"
Thus supposedly "earth" represents Jerusalem, and "sea" represents the nations -- particularly Rome.

So here we see James's idea -- that the beast was coming onto land (leaving Rome, the foreign kingdom, and advancing on Jerusalem)

The 2nd beast landed in Israel, but then, because the first beast was wounded, (Nero's suicide) the war stopped, The rise is connected because Vespasian was the general of the army that attacked Israel when Nero was emperor, Nero's suicide puts a temporal end to the invasion, but then Vespasian resumes the attack when the Flavian Dynasty achieved the power. Thus he rises "again" from the earth.
The two horns of the second beast -- represent the two generals of the army that attacked Jerusalem -- Vespasian and Titus.

All the world worshipped the beast and his image????

Well, this is how they explain it:
"After Titus seized the temple in Jerusalem, the Roman army under Titus’s leadership worshipped the ensigns, one of which is called the numina legionum (meaning “gods of the legions”), the numina legionum was an image of Caesar and his favorites (i.e. Titus). Thus an image of Caesar Vespasian and Titus were worshipped in the Temple in A.D. 70.

Then Titus supposedly called down the fire from heaven????
"by ordering the firing of flaming arrows or debris into Jerusalem during the siege"
also "Under Titus’ leadership, the 12th Legion whose emblem is a lightning bolt—fire from heaven" also supposedly fulfills the prophecy.


So, that's kind of roughly (and probably imperfectly) showing the framework with which preterits look at Revelation 13.

The preterits method of interpretation is VERY different from the historicist method of interpretation. Nor does it really fit the Biblical picture.

And of course -- the fact that most scholars have found the evidence rather overwhelming that the book of Revelation was written around 96 A.D., well AFTER the fall of Jerusalem, which would make it rather irrelevant as a warning of Jerusalem's coming doom!