RE: 3,000 People In Sweden Have Inserted MIcrochips Under Their Skin
You know, I never meant anything I said to be taken as an absolute statement. I guess I can see how you got that from one line I wrote, but it seems that you're intentionally ignoring the part where I explicitly state that the mark may be literal, which should indicate to a careful reader that I don't think there is nothing in the book that's literal. I know there's a strong desire for people who have married their faith to eschatology to always have a correct answer for everything, but I'm just saying you COULD be wrong. If you can't entertain the idea that you don't know Jesus' plans for the end of the world, then I guess I don't really know how to respond to that.
The question I have about this specific passage is this: the whole scene is a dream or vision shown to John that contains a bunch of images and symbolism: what specifically in the text tells you that the part about the mark is literal? Is the seven headed beast in 13:1-9 a literal beast? How about the one in 11-18? Will humanity go back to fighting with swords? YOu have figurative language all the way up to verse 16 for sure, unless you thing breath is literal, then you say all of the sudden the language goes literal at verse 16. Then more symbolism at verse 18. Why take 16 and 17 literal?
As far as "the only time in history" thing, you should probably spend a little time researching the history of eschatology. There has never been a time since Jesus' death in which some Christians didn't think they were living in the end times. So far, they've all been wrong. Why specifically should now be so obviously the right season?
You're right u did say the mark could be literal but my response focused on your other statement, which seemed to contradict the earlier. My view of Revelation is that it's a mixture of literalism and symbolism, I take literally what can be and what clearly can not be as not.. of course I leave open the possibility of being wrong but since I believe the Lord does want to prepare us for this time than a decent amount of literalness has to be there.
The reason why no other generation could have said to have been the last is that only ours has witnessed the rebirth of Israel, scripture is clear that this had to have had occurred before anything could happen.
You're right u did say the mark could be literal but my response focused on your other statement, which seemed to contradict the earlier. My view of Revelation is that it's a mixture of literalism and symbolism, I take literally what can be and what clearly can not be as not.. of course I leave open the possibility of being wrong but since I believe the Lord does want to prepare us for this time than a decent amount of literalness has to be there.
The reason why no other generation could have said to have been is that only ours has witnessed the rebirth of Israel, scripture is clear that this had to have had occurred before anything could happen.
There wasn't a contradiction, you just see everything in absolutes, it seems to me. You didn't really address how that one section of scripture clearly surrounded by symbolic passages is "clearly literal.". There's nothing in the text, unless your Bible is a Schofield.
As far as the rebirth of Israel, can it's not so clear, actually. Read a few minority opinions, it might give you some perspective.
You say you leave open the possibility you could be wrong, but our multiple previous interactions lead me to believe you are deceiving yourself. You're absolutely sure of you positions, and from my experience there is no more sure way to go spectacularly wrong than always being sure you're right.