None:
Polyps:
Strongs:

Introduction

If you really do not understand the book,.. there are a few initial topics that should be understood first (and foremost), and these "Must Reads" are necessary for you to understand the interpretation of Revelation given.

In fact, the topics are required for the Christian to overcome the world, the beast and its mark. I have not included these elsewhere on the site as these topics are fundamental to my (some even to the "generalised") Christian faith. They show the discernment of the believer may be exemplified present in consistent faith in a perfect being (rather than a God of faith alone). That perfect "God" which is of scripture, faith (and also reason) is no liar... instead the believer is required not to submit to God as in, say, Islam but to trust on Him and the gospel of Jesus Christ instead.

The Positive Aesthetic and Dialectic
When people say "show some discernment!" what do they mean? Do they mean for you to consider alone what is positive or to agree with the ultimate standard to which they may or may not also refer? It would make perfect sense to the individual to do it either way, whether they consider it common sense or based on scripture: discernment has but one place, under the authority of Jesus Christ. That is, to accept God's sovereignty to dictate the positive - i.e. good and evil - without the believer deciding for themselves. What divides the two is not obedience, but the paradigm of the believer which in the case of one of the two may be dangerously close to that of the "son of perdition".

Positivity Found A Dilemma
In "all possible worlds", some predicates are positive or not; but across all possible worlds predicates may be both. If there is one God, then God must exemplify a predicate as both positive and negative, there is modal collapse and inconsistency; the term "all possible" collapses to one reality overall: Then how may any didactic absolute be both positive and not? The "God" may not be thought to be "everything positive" and having those predicates; only His creation is so.

Who Is This "Mark" Anyway?
The "mark of the beast" is the greatest "woe" of the three last trumpets in Revelation as they are unable to be deprecated (they are the inheritance of the ungodly). It is true the third woe is not the mark itself, but that woe is the scarlet beast or little horn (which the Church is finally to become) which "forces" (pressures) its mark on its members. There are truly many "marks of the beast" as there are many beasts; yet only one mark may be a possibility and upon that one scarlet beast given, which the image/harlot rides - every other "mark" may be a "fake". Why?

Not Just A Matter Of Timing
The "rapture"... If the rapture is complete bunk, but the scriptures affirm the catching up of the faithful into the clouds of heaven together with Christ and His angels on the last day, is that "rapture" enough? If this truly is the case and the rapture supposedly then post-tribulational, then does the "post-trib" view actually have some validation in the scripture? I argue that this is simply not the case. The "rapture" on the last day is not a simple matter of timing, the doctrine that claims another dispensation is necessary is the real fault, not the expectation of Christ's return or of His judgement.

42
As the axiom of virtue is required to entail Pos(q-1), it is clear that each disjunction is constrained, but the only constraint on any disjunction is nature itself, and this must preserve the liberty of the individual deciding the disjunction or "solving it". As Pos(q) is always correct, there is or must always be a principal element eq remaining on the side in Pos(s), and the binding appears to fail. Instead, God is only constrained by His own creation's curent state, and omnipotence may rework that also. The constraint is on liberty, and there is plenty of that!

Rising Up From The Sea
The "false prophet" beast rises up from the Earth, and the first beast rises up form the sea... both mirror each other by device, yet why they both do not rise up from the Earth is a simple observation, ommitted from the book.


Continue To Next Section

Continue To Next Page


'