Mark of the Beast

[Servetus]

The Armenians and other Oriental Orthodox have it right, ignore Revelation ...

I must respectfully disagree. They have it altogether wrong. Sir Isaac Newton, however, may have gotten it right. Unfortunately, it seems the administrators of his estate don't care to publish his manuscripts which detail his inquiries into the book with which he was at times reportedly practically obsessed, or at the least preoccupied.

Another one who has gotten it right, in my opinion, is W.B. Yeats, who did not ignore the Revelation and who did also, whilst skrying on the Tree of Life (however that is done), see a corroborating "vast image out of Spiritus Mundi" which disturbed not only his sight but also, in his telling of it, disturbed my own.

I have, as a result, added an intense apocalyptic anxiety to some of my other preexisting neuroses and propensities to be attacked by panic. I might have to up my meds .

 

[radarmark]

Fine, you and I will both double up on the Seroquel tonight. Just because Newton and Yeats and Rushdoony love it and liked to play with its meaning and symbolism does nto mean it is necessarily so. I just say, let it lie as it is, IMHO a very convoluted re-telling of the history of the Seven Churches. You can re-interpret it any way you feel necessary. Just do not think it is black or white.

Pax et amore omnia vincunt.

 

[Servetus]

Fine, you and I will both double up on the Seroquel tonight.

That wasn't what I had in mind. I was thinking of something a little more, well, organic ...

 

[radarmark]

I dub enjoy my seoquel....

 

[ciel_perdy]

Hi Dream,

You seem to be bringing up the smooth talking sharlitans who make a lot of money by constantly talking and promoting the book of Revelation, as if that is evidence enough that the book doesn't actually deal with specific events at some point in the future.

Just because there are insincere Christians who couldn't give a hoot about obeying the teachings of Jesus, and as such, twist and mangle Revelation as they do His teachings to promote their own ideaolgy and opinions, really shouldn't matter.

It's funny that your argument (when all is said and done) is that the word 'shortly' is used in the beginning. I don't think shortly means longely, but shortly doesn't HAVE to fit our human understanding of the word either. For God, 2000 years is pretty short!

I have heard the shortly argument before, and really it is pretty lame. You are basically arguing that if the book was literal then it would have all happened 'shortly' after John wrote it, OR, the whole book is esoteric therefore thats the only way 'shortly' makes sense. Convenient.

The funny thing is, you yourself are taking a literal approach to the word 'shortly', with which to base your argument. However if the book was 'esoteric' and clear things like ''no man can buy or sell without a mark in his right hand or forehead'' DIDN'T actually mean what it is saying, then surely the same reasoning could be applied to the word 'shortly'. The point I am trying to make is you simpy keep moving the goal posts when and as it suits your argument. I don't have a problem with saying that babylon the whore is not a real woman who sits upon a seven headed beast, but neither do I find it difficult to see that a text that says, ''no man can buy or sell without this mark'', actually means what it says.

You rightly mention that the book is for the 'servants of Jesus Christ'. Like I have shared before, if you're not interested in obeying his teachings, you simply won't understand the Revelation, because, in clear and honest words, it isn't for you. All of these money-spinners like LaHaye and Jenkins, and the majority of Christian teachers and authors are NOT following Jesus.

One last thought. You talk about how the book is a revealing of Jesus Christ (which indeed it is), but I see your are focusing on his 'name' and it's 'deep mystery', whereas the book is revealing not his NAME but his TEACHINGS/SPIRIT. I wonder if you noticed the correlation I pointed out between the mark of the beast, and what Jesus taught about NOT working for money in Matthew 6:24? There are many more examples of this.

I guess the reason why people like the disconect prophecy from Jesus, is because A: they don't like Jesus' teachings, and B:, they don't like what prophecy is saying.

Anyway, whatever makes you happy.

 

[ciel_perdy]

Same as above post but with some added text (for some reason I couldn't edit the last one)

Hi Dream,

You seem to be bringing up the smooth talking sharlitans who make a lot of money by constantly talking and promoting the book of Revelation, as if that is evidence enough that the book doesn't actually deal with specific events at some point in the future.

Just because there are insincere Christians who couldn't give a hoot about obeying the teachings of Jesus, and as such, twist and mangle Revelation as they do His teachings to promote their own ideaolgy and opinions, really shouldn't matter.

It's funny that your argument (when all is said and done) is that the word 'shortly' is used in the beginning. I don't think shortly means longely, but shortly doesn't HAVE to fit our human understanding of the word either. For God, 2000 years is pretty short!

I have heard the shortly argument before, and really it is pretty lame. You are basically arguing that if the book was literal then it would have all happened 'shortly' after John wrote it, OR, the whole book is esoteric therefore thats the only way 'shortly' makes sense. Convenient.

The funny thing is, you yourself are taking a literal approach to the word 'shortly', with which to base your argument. However if the book was 'esoteric' and clear things like ''no man can buy or sell without a mark in his right hand or forehead'' DIDN'T actually mean what it is saying, then surely the same reasoning could be applied to the word 'shortly'. The point I am trying to make is you simpy keep moving the goal posts when and as it suits your argument. I don't have a problem with saying that babylon the whore is not a real woman who sits upon a seven headed beast, but neither do I find it difficult to see that a text that says, ''no man can buy or sell without this mark'', actually means what it says.

I guess, in short to sum up the attitude of the 'shortly' camp, I am reminded of Jesus' words about ''straining at a nat (or percieved nat), and swallowing a camel''.

You rightly mention that the book is for the 'servants of Jesus Christ'. Like I have shared before, if you're not interested in obeying his teachings, you simply won't understand the Revelation, because, in clear and honest words, it isn't for you. All of these money-spinners like LaHaye and Jenkins, and the majority of Christian teachers and authors are NOT following Jesus.

What I find amusing is that just because those who call themselves 'christians' have butchered Revelation and Jesus' teachings to suit their own bias/prejudice, non-christians seem to think they can take it upon themselves to correct the wrongs, all the while they just add their own biased 'opinion' to the already overflowing sea of biased opinions. If the message is for followers of Christ, and anti-christ christians aren't getting it, why would other 'non christians' who have rejected Jesus'
teachings get it?

One last thought. You talk about how the book is a revealing of Jesus Christ (which indeed it is), but I see your are focusing on his 'name' and it's 'deep mystery', whereas the book is revealing not his NAME but his TEACHINGS/SPIRIT. I wonder if you noticed the correlation I pointed out between the mark of the beast, and what Jesus taught about NOT working for money in Matthew 6:24? There are many more examples of this.

I guess the reason why people like to disconect prophecy from Jesus, is because A: they don't like Jesus' teachings, and B:, they don't like what prophecy is saying.

Anyway, whatever makes you happy.

 

[bob x]

You seem to be bringing up the smooth talking sharlitans who make a lot of money by constantly talking and promoting the book of Revelation, as if that is evidence enough that the book doesn't actually deal with specific events at some point in the future.

It is evidence that "striking" coincidences can be found at any time in human history, and therefore that the existence of any particular coincidence that strikes you as impressive is not, really, very much against the odds.

Just because there are insincere Christians who couldn't give a hoot about obeying the teachings of Jesus, and as such, twist and mangle Revelation as they do His teachings to promote their own ideaolgy and opinions, really shouldn't matter.

Those others are just as "sincere" in thinking they are following the teachings as you are.

 

[Dream]

You rightly mention that the book is for the 'servants of Jesus Christ'. Like I have shared before, if you're not interested in obeying his teachings, you simply won't understand the Revelation, because, in clear and honest words, it isn't for you.

That suggests anyone who seems to understand Revelation better than me must be spiritually healthier than me. Fact is that Revelation 22:7 says "Blessed is he who keeps the words of this book." It doesn't say anything about understanding being a litmus test of spirituality. Understanding can never be that.

You seem to be bringing up the smooth talking sharlitans who make a lot of money by constantly talking and promoting the book of Revelation, as if that is evidence enough that the book doesn't actually deal with specific events at some point in the future.

Maybe I got a little overheated and uncivil, because of the charlatans. That isn't why I think its not about events in the future.

Reading chapter 8 as the seventh seal is broken, an angel offers up the prayers of all the saints . In chapter 5 the prayers of the saints are bowls of incense. Time in Revelation is symbolic like what happens in Revelation chapter 8. Everything that appears to happen in the story is actually happening every moment of our lives at all 'Times':

Every event in Revelation is happening at all times concurrently in your life, because they are symbolic of your relationship to God through Jesus Christ. At this moment John weeps because no one is able to open the seven seals, and at this moment the saints are singing a new song, saying, "Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain" In both chapters 5 and 8 all of the prayers spread out over our generations appear to be offered in a single moment.

Revelation 5:8 And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints;

Revelation 8:1 When the Lamb opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an hour. 2 Then I saw the seven angels who stand before God, and seven trumpets were given to them.....4 and the smoke of the incense rose with the prayers of the saints from the hand of the angel before God.

 

[ciel_perdy]

It is evidence that "striking" coincidences can be found at any time in human history, and therefore that the existence of any particular coincidence that strikes you as impressive is not, really, very much against the odds.

Those others are just as "sincere" in thinking they are following the teachings as you are.

Coincidences MAY be found at any time in human history. If all that was needed to understand and interpret prophecy was coincidence, then I agree, we would be in a lot of trouble. However, I am offering a LOT more than coincidence.

With regards to your second paragraph, the reality is that MOST of these 'others' couldn't even tell you 15-20 things Jesus commanded his disciples to do, let alone actually following what he taught. It may be that I am insincere, and I have to judge myself, but at least I know what Jesus taught. These other guys will fight tooth and nail against obeying as the first disciples did.

 

[ciel_perdy]

Dream wrote:

That suggests anyone who seems to understand Revelation better than me must be spiritually healthier than me. Fact is that Revelation 22:7 says "Blessed is he who keeps the words of this book." It doesn't say anything about understanding being a litmus test of spirituality. Understanding can never be that.

It is you who are bringing up this 'more spiritual argument' not me. All I have said is, if you don't want to obey Jesus, then the book is NOT for you. Nothing about being more spiritual at all, just a clear statement from the book itself, which even YOU were repeatedly used to back up your argument.

Reading chapter 8 as the seventh seal is broken, an angel offers up the prayers of all the saints . In chapter 5 the prayers of the saints are bowls of incense. Time in Revelation is symbolic like what happens in Revelation chapter 8. Everything that appears to happen in the story is actually happening every moment of our lives at all 'Times':

I have no problem with the 'prayers of all the saints' meaning ALL the saints throughout time. The Revelation has a wonderful dance between the present eternal (which God lives in) and the human measure of time which man lives in. Both work together. You see in the book it talks about a plague of locusts that attack man for 5 MONTHS, and it talks about periods of three and half years, mentioned in terms of 42 months, 'time and times and dividing of time' and 1260 days. These are very specific, and have great relevance to things Daniel wrote in which he also used the same time periods. In 9:15-16 it says that four angels gather a great army which are PREPARED for an hour, and a day, and a month, and a year, to slay the third part of me, and that their number is two hundred thousand thousand. Again very specific.

You confidently state '' Everything that appears to happen in the story is actually happening every moment of our lives at all 'Times''. But the reality is it DOESN'T. You are again picking and choosing because it supports your bias/prejudice. You overlook all the other contradictory evidence because it doesn't support your theory.

Every event in Revelation is happening at all times concurrently in your life, because they are symbolic of your relationship to God through Jesus Christ. At this moment John weeps because no one is able to open the seven seals, and at this moment the saints are singing a new song, saying, "Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain" In both chapters 5 and 8 all of the prayers spread out over our generations appear to be offered in a single moment.

Well, I think I agree with the prayers for the saint, and the saints singing to Jesus that he is worthy to open to books is all fine and dandy, it doesn't contradict my understanding at all (though you seem to think it does). Again this is the play between the eternal and time. I agree that there are MANY lessons within the whole book that are applicable to Christians throughout time, but I don't think you honestly want to see that it is also talking about specific events that will happen at one particular POINT.

Anyway, like I said, whatever makes you happy.

 

[Dream]

if you're not interested in obeying his teachings, you simply won't understand the Revelation, because, in clear and honest words, it isn't for you.

You didn't only say that the book isn't for the disobedient. You said that they simply won't understand, and that is throwing down a gauntlet to say who is and isn't in Christ based upon how they interpret this book. Lots of denominations have been started that way. I don't think that following it up with 'Whatever makes you happy' undoes that statement.

As for your statement about 'If you don't want to follow Jesus then this book is not for you.' That makes a lot of sense, except that I've lived my life under the sway of this book and been hurt using this book but finally received the blessing of it because I kept it. I'm responsible for it now and also for you who are of my same original group or close relation. Besides, its God's mercy that leads us to repentance. The book remains my business either way. How does it go..."The gifts and the calling of God are without repentance."

You confidently state '' Everything that appears to happen in the story is actually happening every moment of our lives at all 'Times''. But the reality is it DOESN'T. You are again picking and choosing because it supports your bias/prejudice. You overlook all the other contradictory evidence because it doesn't support your theory.

Who doesn't have a bias? You don't? Are you a cold and calculating alien from the planet, Vulcan? (rhetorical and not an insult)

 

[ciel_perdy]

Dream:

You didn't only say that the book isn't for the disobedient. You said that they simply won't understand, and that is throwing down a gauntlet to say who is and isn't in Christ based upon how they interpret this book. Lots of denominations have been started that way. I don't think that following it up with 'Whatever makes you happy' undoes that statement.

I don't know who is in Christ and who is not, and the Kingdom of Heaven is invisible, and only God knows the full membership (which transcends religious boundaries). The reality is the book is NOT for people who don't want to obey/follow Jesus. Theology doesn't save us, and that includes whether or not we 'understand' Revelation. I would say though, that if one sincerely wants to obey Jesus' teachings, it will cause him to understand the Revelation, because it is a revealing of his teachings. Conversely, if one isn't interested in obeying Jesus, then a book that is all about revealing HIM, they won't understand.

I do think people can be sincere and have a wrong understanding or Revelation and Jesus' teachings, but I also believe that if we are sincerely seeking truth, we will change when we find it.

As for your statement about 'If you don't want to follow Jesus then this book is not for you.' That makes a lot of sense, except that I've lived my life under the sway of this book and been hurt using this book but finally received the blessing of it because I kept it.

What exactly have you kept? Why is is that you haven't acknowlegded my repeated attempts to relate Revelation to the clear teachings of Jesus about NOT working for money, and how that relates to the mark of the beast?

I'm responsible for it now and also for you who are of my same original group or close relation.

What exactly are you responsible for? I don't think you are honestly interpreting the book and it's relevance to the teachings of Jesus. So I don't understand what you FEEL responsible for?

Besides, its God's mercy that leads us to repentance. The book remains my business either way. How does it go..."The gifts and the calling of God are without repentance."

Sure it's God's mercy that leads us to repentance, but I am not sure WHY you are bringing that up now. It seems a bit out of 'left-field'. My guess is you are bringing it up because I keep on hammering on about OBEYING Jesus. The next sentence is telling, ''The book remains my business either way''. This shows me that really you don't want to see where you could be wrong, because regardless, ''it's your business''. Which indeed it is.

Who doesn't have a bias? You don't? Are you a cold and calculating alien from the planet, Vulcan? (rhetorical and not an insult)

We all have biases, but we should all be trying to put aside our biases in favor or looking for truth. I just don't see you doing that by your blatent disregard of my responses to your questions (responeses that show the your faulty reasoning), the abundance of evidence that I have been presenting, and it's relation the teachings of Jesus.

 

[A Cup Of Tea]

ciel_perdy, don't you think that you're arrogant?

 

[radarmark]

ACOT-- yet another case of "I believe thusly so it must be true and thou shalt believe the same way" without the sword, thank G!d!

Pax et amore omnia vincunt.

 

[Dream]

I don't know who is in Christ and who is not, and the Kingdom of Heaven is invisible, and only God knows the full membership (which transcends religious boundaries). The reality is the book is NOT for people who don't want to obey/follow Jesus. Theology doesn't save us, and that includes whether or not we 'understand' Revelation.

Amen. I'll explain why I appear to have been avoiding your topic, and I value your gifts. There were a couple of other forum members who got very stressed over me when I unintentionally forgot things they had posted earlier and misunderstood what point they were trying to make. So I know sometimes its a problem, but its an unintentional one. One was NettiNetti and the other was Dpickled (or something pickled). I'm sorry if I appear to be unaware of some things you've posted, but I can still respond if you point them out.

I would say though, that if one sincerely wants to obey Jesus' teachings, it will cause him to understand the Revelation, because it is a revealing of his teachings. Conversely, if one isn't interested in obeying Jesus, then a book that is all about revealing HIM, they won't understand.

I'm aware of numerous disagreements between various churches about Revelation, and I'm totally convinced that all concerned were/are very interested in Jesus teachings. For me that is evidence that its possible to be both sincere and incorrect.

I do think people can be sincere and have a wrong understanding or Revelation and Jesus' teachings, but I also believe that if we are sincerely seeking truth, we will change when we find it.

Seeking is important but it may not be the entire component. Life gets in the way sometimes. An example is a woman with 5 kids (or even just one). How is she going to have time? But what she thinks about Revelation still matters, even if she doesn't completely master the subject she has mastered it if she, as you say, keeps Jesus' teachings.

What exactly have you kept? Why is is that you haven't acknowledged my repeated attempts to relate Revelation to the clear teachings of Jesus about NOT working for money, and how that relates to the mark of the beast?

I have "Kept the words of this book" by not adding to them or taking away, except that I have tried to explain them to you. It is true that Jesus said you can't be the servant of both God and Mammon. In truth if we we all were purely spiritual we'd have nothing to do with money.

What exactly are you responsible for? I don't think you are honestly interpreting the book and it's relevance to the teachings of Jesus. So I don't understand what you FEEL responsible for?

What I mean is you're pretty dismissive of someone who's life was shaped by your community. I lot of people grow up in churches and are forgotten if they leave, or if they have disagreement are dismissed as if they'd never been members. As if I can just be dismissed because I disagree with you about something or as if I'd no longer weigh in on a discussion about Revelation. We have a responsibility to one another. As Jesus taught, the good shepherd leaves 99 sheep behind to go after 1 that's wandered. That's why I said 'The gifts and calling of God are without repentance, which is a verse from Romans 11:29

Sure it's God's mercy that leads us to repentance, but I am not sure WHY you are bringing that up now. It seems a bit out of 'left-field'. My guess is you are bringing it up because I keep on hammering on about OBEYING Jesus. The next sentence is telling, ''The book remains my business either way''. This shows me that really you don't want to see where you could be wrong, because regardless, ''it's your business''. Which indeed it is.

See above. Allegorically speaking it is a spirit of Cain that says "I do not know. Am I my brother's keeper?" Rhetorically the answer is 'Yes'. If someone is from your community and leaves it becomes that much more important what they think about any particular Bible topic. The only point I wanted to make to you was Revelation, church hymns, the gospel and all other things continue to be your province even if you've left the church. Its a divisive spirit that cuts people off at the first sign of trouble. The most dangerous problems that surround Revelation are not its misinterpretation but the fact that often people choose to cut each other off rather than accept disagreement.

We all have biases, but we should all be trying to put aside our biases in favor or looking for truth. I just don't see you doing that by your blatent disregard of my responses to your questions (responeses that show the your faulty reasoning), the abundance of evidence that I have been presenting, and it's relation the teachings of Jesus.

Would you rather that I respond to all of your statements? It could get very long and unreadable. I didn't mean to skip over your arguments but thought I was selecting quotes that captured what you were saying.

 

[bob x]

Coincidences MAY be found at any time in human history. If all that was needed to understand and interpret prophecy was coincidence, then I agree, we would be in a lot of trouble. However, I am offering a LOT more than coincidence.

No you aren't. What you offer is no different in kind than what others in past times have offered in support of their belief that "now" was the time (1532, or 1847, or 1975).

With regards to your second paragraph, the reality is that MOST of these 'others' couldn't even tell you 15-20 things Jesus commanded

That is because there were only two.

 

[Dream]

Precisely. The book is talking in code about the contemporary political situation of the 1st century. Deciphering it now, when we can't hope to catch all the references, is pretty hopeless; trying to apply it to the present day is an enormous mis-interpretation. At its most basic, it is reassuring the Christians that the Roman state which looked so enormous and unstoppable was really finished; it's talking about the end of the world as they knew it.

That's interesting with several questions. Is that a personal theory? Is it the product of a particular circle of scholars? Is it based upon a late date for the book? Does it depend upon the analysis of writing styles in any way? Thanks, Bobx.

 

[ciel_perdy]

Hi Dream,

I guess, we will just have to agree to diasgree. Your explanation of Revelation, IMO, is wrong. Equally, you think mine is too. Which is fair enough.
I think the sad thing is, that either we are both just promoting our own IDEAS about what it means, or one of us has more light/truth about what it means, and the other isn't listening.

I guess the main point (though there were others), that you were skipping over a lot, was the issue about Jesus teaching his disciples NOT to work for money but to live by faith, and how that relates so beautifully with the mark of the beast prophecy.

You finally got around to repsonding to this point by saying:

It is true that Jesus said you can't be the servant of both God and Mammon. In truth if we we all were purely spiritual we'd have nothing to do with money.

You seem to be missing the point. Jesus taught his disciples to NOT work for money. He did not say ''do not use money''. If fact, it appears as if his disciples and him used money. Indeed, he commands his disciples to sell all they have and give the money to the poor (as one example).

Often people react to this teaching of Jesus because it challenges our very way of life. They react either by claiming he didn't mean what he said, or they go to the other extreme of saying that to be spiritual we shouldn't even use it. Can you see that this is side-stepping the real issue? Again, it's not whether or not we USE money, but it's whether or not we WORK for it.
So no need to be 'purely spiritual' at all, which should be a HUGE relief to all those 'Christians' out there that were interested in following this teaching of Jesus, but thought they were inadequate.

One last thing, you say I am ''pretty dimissive of someone who's life was shaped by my community''. Can you explain that, i.e. how, who and why? I think I may know what you mean, but perhaps you can clarify it further.

 

[ciel_perdy]

No you aren't. What you offer is no different in kind than what others in past times have offered in support of their belief that "now" was the time (1532, or 1847, or 1975).

That is because there were only two.

I disagree with you bob. In all those time you mention there was not the ability to put something on everyones hand or forehead without which they could not buy or sell. Well, 1975 comes the closest to that possibility, but even then the problem is that there actually WASN'T a marketable technology out and about with which to do so.

Whereas, I what I am offering is that today we actually HAVE the technology, cash, cheques and coins are slowely being fazed out, more emphasis is being put on other forms of monetary transactions that don't use cash, to the point that even in clubs in Europe people are having microchips implanted in their arm. You see, what is happening today is MANY more times relevant and applicable to the prophecy than those dates you mention.

Also, (I don't know who preached what around those dates), but invariably EVER theory I have heard from others who said that the mark has come, never seem to have the two basic facts of the prophecy backing up their claim. 1: no one can buy or sell without it, and, 2: it is in the hand or forehead.

I am also offering a very cohesive relation to what Jesus taught about not working for money and it's relation to the Mark of the Beast. Most, if not all of these other theories tend to consistently leave out any relevance to Jesus and his teachings. If the prophecy's interpretation isn't stemming from or leading back to Christ, then you can have a fair bet it's way off.

Therefore I am offering coincidence (as in people already getting a 'mark' in their body, albeit in the arm at present), cicumstances, (we ARE moving towards a cashless society, we DO have the ability to 'mark' everyone and make it the only way for financial transactions), Jesus' teaching, in that his teachings of not working for money and living by faith are incredibly relevant to the mark of the beast prophecy.

With regards to your comment about the commandments, Jesus taught his disciples to DO and NOT DO a lot of things, quite aside from the 2 Greatest commandments. A command is a directive to do or not do something. A fun thing to do is read through the gospels, underlining every time you see Jesus telling his disciples to do something or not do something. You'll be surprised with how MANY things he expects us to do and not do.

 

[Dream]

Hi Dream,

I guess, we will just have to agree to diasgree. Your explanation of Revelation, IMO, is wrong. Equally, you think mine is too. Which is fair enough.
I think the sad thing is, that either we are both just promoting our own IDEAS about what it means, or one of us has more light/truth about what it means, and the other isn't listening.

I guess the main point (though there were others), that you were skipping over a lot, was the issue about Jesus teaching his disciples NOT to work for money but to live by faith, and how that relates so beautifully with the mark of the beast prophecy.

You finally got around to repsonding to this point by saying:

Hi, Ciel Perdy.
Yes, there's some grief for us, however (without explaining at length in this thread) I think some disagreement is both acceptable and necessary. Its a Biblical point of view that I've touched on in other threads and over recent years have seen emphasized in various Bible passages in heavy concentration. It has a lot to do with not trusting in the systems and mechanisms that we tend to set up as an extension of our own influence over sanctification. I think these are represented in Revelation as well. I'd see no problem if somebody thinks about atonement differently, such as whether there is original sin etc. I see inconsistency if someone makes it a matter of fellowship.

You seem to be missing the point. Jesus taught his disciples to NOT work for money. He did not say ''do not use money''. If fact, it appears as if his disciples and him used money. Indeed, he commands his disciples to sell all they have and give the money to the poor (as one example).

Often people react to this teaching of Jesus because it challenges our very way of life. They react either by claiming he didn't mean what he said, or they go to the other extreme of saying that to be spiritual we shouldn't even use it. Can you see that this is side-stepping the real issue? Again, it's not whether or not we USE money, but it's whether or not we WORK for it.

As a practical consideration I do have a problem with that, but you may have a point about what Jesus is literally saying.

One last thing, you say I am ''pretty dimissive of someone who's life was shaped by my community''. Can you explain that, i.e. how, who and why? I think I may know what you mean, but perhaps you can clarify it further.

It really comes down to when you say "...either we are both just promoting our own IDEAS about what it means, or one of us has more light/truth about what it means." I feel this is a mostly American attitude that is homegrown rather than a Biblical, even sola-scriptura, point of view. There is strong emphasis in the Bible on the perfection of God and our own imperfection, so that you'll see verses like "Let God be true but every man a liar...that he be proved right in his judgments." By 'Dismissive' I mean you see it as a situation where one of us can be more right than the other. Its suggesting that God is favoring one of us. It naturally leads to divisions and the promotion of idle persons to ministry, but it also separates close friends unnecessarily and divides everyone up into rankings.