|
Re: Mark of the beast idea
Serious question: If "shortly come to pass" , or "at hand" does not mean "imminent" or "soon," from the writers or to the recipients of the letters perspective, as he was inspired by God on what to write, there can only be one of two possible reasons.
1.) Either it did occur but some have failed to recognize, understand or admit that it did, in that it doesn't fit their position as to how it should occur.
2.) Or, it didn't occur as the writer said it would, in which case the writer either misunderstood God or simply wrote it down incorrectly.
If #1 is correct, it incumbent upon us to grasp what is being said and adjust our views to agree with what is obviously stated in the scriptures, even if at first one doesn't fully comprehend how or when.
If #2 is the case, it would be saying the Bible has an error in it or God misled the writer, but whatever the case here, we would by default be saying the Bible is not correct on this point.
Conclusion: The Bible is very clear and has said it multiple times in various ways that it was about to occur during the time it was written and to whom it was addressed to, of that there can be no legitimate debate, so we must conform to the clear words as written and accept it had to have meant what it said to those it was addressed to, so we must search what did it mean to them then and how did it occur. If it didn't occur, the Bible is suspect on it's accuracy.
The notion that it is speaking from God's perspective of time, is a bogus argument intended for one to retain one's position. (the 1 day with the Lord is as of a thousand years to us is in no way a time template for things prophetic on several points)
Just one of the things I have had to come to grips with in my years of study.
|
Linear Mode
