Mark of the beast idea

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Esaias

The futurist interpretation is NOT "stated in the Bible" anymore than the preterist interpretation.


Sure it is, it involves very little commentary. It allows the reader to look at the world he lives in and connect the dots himself, without someone explaining ideas that are "unnoticed" in the simple passage or "reading between the lines".

Seeking to understand spiritual truths by recourse to the Word of God is NOT watering things down.

If you are saying an event that was slated to happen in the future has already happened, it is WASHING AWAY the meaning.

Anyway, futurism and preterism are both Jesuit counter-reformation propaganda imo, so sally forth people! lol

If you just stop thinking about everything you know already...relax...pick up the Bible and read it. You can see clearly as you read. Just like the good ol days before you started "thinking about stuff".

Thats how the Bible was intended for us to read. When it stops meaning something to us personally, relating to prophecy, we are already dead and in heaven.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Sean

If you just stop thinking about everything you know already...relax...pick up the Bible and read it. You can see clearly as you read. Just like the good ol days before you started "thinking about stuff".

Thats how the Bible was intended for us to read. When it stops meaning something to us personally, relating to prophecy, we are already dead and in heaven.

Brother, just because I am not a futurist doesn't mean prophecy doesn't relate to me "personally".

Preterism makes prophecy essentially irrelevent for the post AD70 church. Futurism makes prophecy essentially irrelevent for the "pre-rapture" church. Both render Antichrist a thing not to beware of for the vast majority of the Christians who have lived. Both leave Christians without a prophetic guide for some 1900 odd years. Both can be traced historically to the Roman counter-reformation. Both lead to various absurdities like pre-trib rapture or AD70 rapture. Preterism tends towards hyper-allegorizing and futurism tends towards hyper-literalising.

I find preterism inconsistent and futurism inconsistent. I mean within their own sets of premises. And I read the Bible for what it says, within its own context. I find therein prophesied a great apostacy from the faith, the rise of a pseudo-christian establishment, its secular and worldly power, it's centuries-long persecution of ALL who refuse its lordship, its apparent degeneration to an atrophied state, its sudden and "miraculous recovery" and renewed persecution of the saints, and its eventual overthrow and demise.

I also read of the promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob/Israel and how they would become a multitude of powerful nations. How thry would be paganized but yet evangelized and carry God's Word to all the families of the world. How they would apostasize and come under attack and in repentance turn to the Lord and find deliverance.

And tracking history I find the amazing fact that those and many other prophecies have been fulfilled and continue to be fulfilled. So prophecy is immensely relevant to me personally.

Which is why I reject preterism and futurism both.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Brother, just because I am not a futurist doesn't mean prophecy doesn't relate to me "personally".

Preterism makes prophecy essentially irrelevent for the post AD70 church. Futurism makes prophecy essentially irrelevent for the "pre-rapture" church. Both render Antichrist a thing not to beware of for the vast majority of the Christians who have lived. Both leave Christians without a prophetic guide for some 1900 odd years. Both can be traced historically to the Roman counter-reformation. Both lead to various absurdities like pre-trib rapture or AD70 rapture. Preterism tends towards hyper-allegorizing and futurism tends towards hyper-literalising.

I find preterism inconsistent and futurism inconsistent. I mean within their own sets of premises. And I read the Bible for what it says, within its own context. I find therein prophesied a great apostacy from the faith, the rise of a pseudo-christian establishment, its secular and worldly power, it's centuries-long persecution of ALL who refuse its lordship, its apparent degeneration to an atrophied state, its sudden and "miraculous recovery" and renewed persecution of the saints, and its eventual overthrow and demise.

I also read of the promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob/Israel and how they would become a multitude of powerful nations. How thry would be paganized but yet evangelized and carry God's Word to all the families of the world. How they would apostasize and come under attack and in repentance turn to the Lord and find deliverance.

And tracking history I find the amazing fact that those and many other prophecies have been fulfilled and continue to be fulfilled. So prophecy is immensely relevant to me personally.

Which is why I reject preterism and futurism both.

I respect your opinion, but may I ask, do you believe in a "certain" position of others' concepts, or just disagree with everyone elses stuff?

If you agree with anothers' position, what DO YOU believe?

Just curious. If you dont want a rebuttal from me, let me know. Im just curious about folks' differing opinions these days.