Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean
The problem with you is, you think the book of Rev. is a scrabble game of random words.
|
No, I just believe what the first verse said about it.
You won't pay attention to this, but maybe someone else will see the point. The first verse of the whole book says God gave a message by SIGNFYING it. That means it was given by SIGNS. And if there was only two or three SIGNS in the entire book, why introduce the entire book by saying it is a message related BY SIGNS????
That would be as silly as saying I am going to talk to you about COLORS, and speak for three hours and only mention two colors, taking up one minute out of three hours to do so.
lol
And those SIGNS can be found in the rest of the bible where we see how they're used to understand their place in Revelation. Jesus was called a LAMB that takes away sins when John the baptist announced Him. So when
Rev 5 speaks of the LAMB we know it is Jesus. That is letting the bible interpret Revelation. But when people hardly know the whole bible, they miss all these references to the rest of the bible that are found in Revelation. The early church knew more of one book of the Old Testament Christians today now of the entire old testament. So they miss 90% of the SIGNS in Revelation.
That's another reason I left dispensationalism. It was based on lack of understanding, and thinking Revelation is a set of movies of the future, when it's a set of SIGNS used in the rest of the Bible, primarily the Old Testament. Only people with a good working knowledge of the overall bible can catch the signs.
Threaded Mode
