How Cash-less are you?

[Gerald Creasy]

Gerald I have tried to understand what it is your ae saying. I get the jist of it but are you saying you do not believe in end time things at all. No mark of the beast or anything that it already happened?

No it is not that I do not Believe what we are told in Revelations, It is that I believe that THE INTERPRETATION thereof is very very flimsy.

For instance, you see the Mark of the Beast most likely as some futuristic event of dire consequences. over the years I have seen this taught as the Social Security Number, UPC codes, Computer chips, computers themselves and probably several other things I cant recall.

I see in the scripture which mentions the Mark as an allusion to an Old testament Event which ALSO spoke of Marks in the foreheads. SINCE THAT allusion was in the context of a SPECIFIC EVENT in Jewish History I think that POSSIBLY the Mark in Revelations refers to an ALMOST IDENTICAL event which occured SHortly after Revelations was written.


The objection "but this applies to the End Times" begs the question "The End times OF WHAT?"

[pastorables]

For instance, you see the Mark of the Beast most likely as some futuristic event of dire consequences. over the years I have seen this taught as the Social Security Number, UPC codes, Computer chips, computers themselves and probably several other things I cant recall.

Gerald,

Just because men are in error concerning interpretation or application doesn't preempt prophecy from having a destined appearance. What about when men said that Jesus was John the Baptist or Elias? Did this make him any less Christ, the son of God? Men have always made erroneous conclusions and predictions and will likely continue to to so.

I am curious as to what part of Revelation you are willing to concede to the future?

pa

[MacUser]

On the cash I go in spurts... usually like to keep something in my wallet for emergencies..

[Gerald Creasy]

Just because men are in error concerning interpretation or application doesn't preempt prophecy from having a destined appearance. What about when men said that Jesus was John the Baptist or Elias? Did this make him any less Christ, the son of God? Men have always made erroneous conclusions and predictions and will likely continue to to so.

Yes, but, as in YOUR example, PROOF was given them in the Old Testament as to who Jesus was, they did not understand. As Jesus said, "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

In Rev 1:2 revelations is called the Testimony of Christ.

You concede that Revelations requires SOME OT to be understood, yet can give no criteria for what parts of the OT can and what parts of the OT cannot be used to understand Revelations.

It seems to me that if the OT testifys of Christ and revelation is called the testimony of Christ, that you'd be BOUND to use as much OT as humanly possible.

While God himself repeatatively refers to Israel as a whore in the OT, with no resource whatsoever you dismiss this possibility for the Whore God talks about in Revelations.

Again: By What standard do you pick and choose?

The lack of criteria can even be seen in how Futurist interpret a SINGLE passage in Revelations. "The mark" is seen as symbolic (a computer chip, retina scan or whatever) but the results of that SYMBOLIC mark are literal "they can't buy or sell" without it.

WHAT standard decides that within a single entry part IS symbolic and part isnt?

I am curious as to what part of Revelation you are willing to concede to the future?

I have not studied that far as of yet.

I seek an interpretation that does not change every few years with current events, that is based upon Old Testament precedence as much as possible, that would make sense to the first century church to who Revelations was written and that does less damage to the Word of God in the eyes of people who may NOT be believers but see the failed interpretations over and over again and thereby think less of the Word of God.

[pastorables]

Gerald,

I am going back to the Doctrine forum with this discussion.

pa

[Dr. Ron]

I am one of the old timers who refuses to use the cards.....

I carry cash....as much as I can talk my wife out of and I do not let her leave the house without at least $20.00. I generally carry between one and two hundred with me at all times....but my reasons are different...

I dont' buy much of anything for myself anyway....but I can't give spontaneously with a card.....I love handing a $20.00 to some one and telling them..."God bless you". It is something I have done for years and I love the thrill of seeing their faces knowing that someone gave them money...in the name of the Lord .....just to bless them.

So, I money ever goes away...I will have to carry a truck load of stuff to give away....

I have to admit, I love the feel of cash in my money clip...not for me...but for those times when God says "now....bless them now".

I have never told anyone this but my wife.

[scooter]

I carry cash.... I generally carry between one and two hundred with me at all times...
.

Response: That is great to know.

[Paully_44]

I spend whatever I have with me, which is usually with my debit card.

[paul]

I generally keep about $100 in my pocket. don't always use it. but feel more comfortable with it there in case of situations as mention already in the post. Use debit card generally. But out here that is starting to get costly. ARCO gas charges .45 to use debit....Jack in the box is now .95.

Puzzels me as to why all of a sudden they are charging to use the debit. I sure they must pay a small fee/phone line charge. But that seems much better than all NSF checks taped to the register. I guess it just one more way to nickel and dime a person.

[AndyG]

(Spoke in a bad russian accent)
What is this thing you call Cash? Was he not some prison singer or some such like?

[Darling]

We were out Christmas shopping last week. Went to the counter to purchase something with the debit card. the clerk said their machine wasn't working; so I wrote a check. this morning, I was looking on line into our checking account and low and behold, our card had worked at the store withdrew the amount of the sale, then put it directly back into our account. guess this clerk didn't know the machine or maybe it was just Christmas help.

[Gerald Creasy]

I generally keep about $100 in my pocket. don't always use it. but feel more comfortable with it there in case of situations as mention already in the post. Use debit card generally. But out here that is starting to get costly. ARCO gas charges .45 to use debit....Jack in the box is now .95.

Puzzels me as to why all of a sudden they are charging to use the debit. I sure they must pay a small fee/phone line charge. But that seems much better than all NSF checks taped to the register. I guess it just one more way to nickel and dime a person.

Is the debit card a Visa or Mastercard Debit card?

[paul]

VISA ...does it make a difference ?

[Gerald Creasy]

VISA ...does it make a difference ?

I could understand if they were charging a fee for using a non-Credit Card Debit associated Debit, but if they're charging a fee for using a VISA associated card they're passing along a fee that the business is charged by VISA everytime a VISA card is used.

If they do that for VISA debits and not VISA credit, that's pretty disreputable, in my opinion.

(My ex used to work in credit card fraud (and even won an award from VISA) and I learned a lot of things about Credit cards)

If such things begin happening around here...it will definitely curtail the use of a debit card BY ME.

[DaJudge]

Be careful with those debit cards guys. If a crook gets ahold of it, they can clean out your bank account and it can take a month or so to get the bank to replace your money. I prefer credit cards. If someone were to steal it, I just call the company and tell them, put a dispute on the charges and that's it. I just make sure to pay of the balance in full each month.

As for cash, I never have any. When I have cash, I spend it.