Two people listened to a story. Both people heard the same information from beginning to end. But when these two people were tasked with sharing the story with others, many of the details became changed. As a result, both those retelling the story came to different conclusions on what they perceived was said. As a result, the story passed on to others was different from the original, not in major detail, but as this story is retold many times, these little differences add up to the story becoming completely different from the original.

How does that happen?
 
There is a well-known game called Chinese whispers. You can have 10 people in a line. You would whisper a short story into the ear of the first, and they would whisper it on to the next person in the line, and by the time they got to the end of the line, the story can be completely different and bear little or no resemblance to the original story.
 
Why does this happen?
 
Each of us at the time we hear a story are the sum of all we have learned throughout our lives in conversations, education, reading and our desires, both fulfilled and unfulfilled. This sets us up to be biased in what we take from a story or something we witness. Not intentionally, but because we have become accustomed to doing this rather than becoming overloaded with a constant barrage of information. However, this does mean that we have to make an effort to examine something from another perspective, especially when it goes against what we are accustomed to.
 
When the police take a statement about an accident or other event from witnesses, the different statements can vary wildly in their description of what happened. This is because the witnesses will have a different perspective on what they saw depending on where they were standing, what they were doing and even what was on their mind at the time. Each person is certain in their own mind as to what they saw. One person can be positive the person involved was wearing a blue shirt and jeans and another just as certain that they were wearing red trousers and a hoodie.
 
When we hear something or see something, we do not always process all the information we receive, but we mentally take cliff notes. We hear or see something that we recognize, and it is that that we tend to focus on. It is not a deliberate act but focusing on the familiar is easier mentally than processing new information. To learn something new we must focus on the information and realize it may well differ from what we are used to hearing or seeing. To learn we must apply ourselves, in other words, make an effort to examine all the information and not just what we already know and is familiar. This applies to everything from learning a new language to studying Scripture, learning to use a new machine via a manual to learning to cook and become a chef.
 
We come across new information every day, but we only take in a small amount of the information we are faced with, if something does not pique our interest or is unfamiliar, we usually just let it pass by us. This is why law enforcement officers and agents of government organizations are trained in observation and how to keep this constant slew of new information available to repeat back and use at a later date.
 
If this practice of retaining without bias all the information we absorb were natural and easy to all, it would not have to be taught to people as a special tactic that must be honed over time. 
 
For the rest of us we must realize that we are not infallible in our understanding of what we hear, see and understand because of this taking in the bits of information that grab our attention. This does not mean we do not want to learn something new or believe that we are only hearing what we want, but we always automatically focus on the familiar. When something comes along that challenges the familiar, we have a tendency, all of us, to try and justify our position because we do not like to be wrong.
 
Is this pride or fear? 
 
Being wrong because our conventional views are challenged can make us uncomfortable, and as a result, we, often, reject out of hand what is making us uncomfortable or challenging a long-held belief system. This is true of every aspect of our lives. When we are driving a car, and we are obeying the law as taught in the highway code and somebody else doesn’t, we have a reaction. They are not doing things the way we were taught they should be done, as a result it instantly gets our “back up”. Even if what they do does not directly affect us, we have our own thoughts on the matter which we will often verbalize or let the horn speak for us.
 
When it comes to scripture and what it says, we have two views we must consider. Today when we examine scripture, we do it through the eyes of someone brought up from a western gentile perspective. We do it through the lens of our Greek mindset and culture, giving us a preconceived perspective on how we view things. As a result, we pick out the parts when learning that fit in with our worldview.
 
The other is the Judaic view. When the first Jewish believers heard the gospel message, it was not new to them or different. It was a familiar message that tied in with the worldview they had been brought up in.
 
Understanding that any perspective is based on our upbringing, culture and social expectations providing us with a mindset that may differ from others will help us become aware of the need to study all the information we receive to come to a correct conclusion. A child brought up in a home that is rampantly anti-Semitic and Aryan in its views will congregate with other like-minded people as they grow. This is the worldview that shapes their opinions and what they take from a conversation or something they see. However, a child brought up in a home that has a love for the Jewish people will conversely congregate with others of like mind.
 
Society is complex and has many subsets of views based on the network of friends, education and bias of teachers, especially our universities. This reveals the importance of recognizing the different views people have when approaching a topic and what they may take from the information given. There is a cult in India that do not believe in fear. They will not use the brakes on their vehicle when driving and weave madly in and out of the traffic until they reach their destination or crash. To us that seems like lunacy, but to him brought up in that cultural belief it is normal practice. He may even believe that it is everyone else that is wrong.
 
Again, we are all a product of our upbringing and the worldview we have had instilled in us. When we come to Yeshua Messiah, we are to renew our minds, in other words, change our perspective from what we have been taught by our society and worldview to come in line with what scripture declares is correct. The problem is, when we examine from a western perspective, we inherently take from the writings what is familiar. Doing this gives a completely different perspective from those who approach with a Judaic perspective. They take from scripture what is familiar from their worldview. 
 
It is important to remember that the scriptures were given to the Jews by a God who created the Jewish nation and called them His people. He gave the commandments, righteous lifestyle and desire for holiness to these people. As western Christians it is important to understand that we are grafted into people that have been created to worship Adonai. 
 
This does not mean we are to observe rabbinic Judaism or become Jewish as gentiles. But we must come to understand the faith of the people Adonai created and moulded to bring the gospel message to the rest of the world. A very Jewish message with a Jewish Messiah that we are grafted into.
 
When we leave the original intent of scripture and the understanding of the people it was given to, we must by default delve into opinions to bring an understanding that we can come to terms with. However, not having an awareness of the original intent, the idioms, and traditions of the people, much can be either missed or misunderstood.
 
Before the advent of Christianity, the people Adonai chose and used for His purposes here on earth were walking, acknowledging, and obeying (for the most part) what it was Adonai wanted, both from them and for them. This relationship was built up over 4000 years. That is 4000 years of relationship that has been discarded by so many today declaring that was for the Jews and we now have another way through Jesus.
 
However, Jesus/Yeshua was a Torah observant Jew, He went to Synagogue on Shabbat (Saturday), He kept the biblical God ordained feasts and He showed in practice how the Torah was to be lived and we are to follow Him and live like He did.
 
Sadly, modern believers have turned around and declared, only a few hundred years after the gentiles started to be grafted in that the old way was no more. This is the ultimate in hubris to declare that Adonai has finished with something He has spent 4000 years putting into place because various gentiles who became the heads of the traditional churches re-established God’s word to suit their beliefs as to what is right. As a result, today we have a form of faith that is manmade through opinion as God’s way has been rejected as done away with.
We are warned of an end time apostate set of believers that no longer follow the teachings of Adonai but have their own form of righteousness. This is what we are seeing today. We have teachers who proclaim that the church has replaced Israel, that he Torah or as it’s usually translated as, Law, is done away with. Yet it is this very Law/Torah that Yeshua came to show us how to live. Some even teach that the Law/Torah is evil: this is in fact declaring in no uncertain terms that God is evil because He gave men a way to relate to Him that was evil. This is known as apostacy. It comes from the teachings of a well-known heretic called Marcion. Marcion taught that the God of the Old Testament, called the Demiurge, was an evil God and when Yeshua/Jesus came He defeated this evil God and replaced Him, he took away works and gave us grace.
 
We must be aware of the difference between the traditions and teachings of men taking precedence over the words of Scripture and what Adonai expects from us, and how to relate to Him, His way. The Pharisees placed their traditions ahead of the written Torah and even had the audacity to call their traditions Torah or equal to God’s word. This was what Yeshua, and the apostles were standing against. Today's Rabbinic Judaism ties directly back to these pharisees and hold the same teachings.
 
Modern believers are doing the same thing, their traditions have been put forward as the way to go to have fellowship with Adonai. His way in the Torah is rejected – His way brings blessing and life; man’s way brings curses and death.
 
Beware apostasy through tradition.
 

The Bus Ride
M Debono-De-Laurentis
 
I was trying to think of a way to describe Israel and the remnant of believers in Israel with the picture of how the gentiles are grafted in. It is a complicated topic that is further confused by the plethora of different beliefs prevalent on the topic.
 
So, I came up with the idea of a bus to explain it in what I hope is a simple, yet easy to understand the depiction of what scripture intends for us to understand on these topics.
 
I think this analogy will work, so please bear with me as we examine this in terms that I hope we can all understand.
 
A bus driver and his son decide to build a bus. Knowing that passengers can be fickle and have a tendency to disrupt other passengers, they produced a set of rules before they build the bus so that passengers could understand what is required of them if they want to board and remain on the bus. 
 
The bus driver reaches the point in his scheme to build his bus and after much disappointment with previous possible contractors, he employs a chap with some integrity and along with his family are prepared to help the driver construct it. The driver promises this helper that when the bus is complete is will have many seats for his family and any that come alongside him. 
 
It took a while, but once the bus was complete it was given the name of Israel. Many, many passengers were riding this bus, but some of them decided they did not want to follow the rules for staying on the bus. Some decided they did not like the direction the driver was taking them and got off the bus. Others decided that the driver of the bus wasn’t even real as they couldn’t see him from where they sat, so they too got off the bus. Others thought they could find a better bus driver who would give an easier ride and allow them more latitude than what was allowed on the bus.
 
Passengers would get off the bus and go their own way, but if they came back to the bus driver, apologise for their disobedience and agree to again follow the rules and have a relationship with him, they would be allowed back on, but only if they had not committed anything unforgivable according to the drivers’ standards.
 
Any troubles that began on the bus would occur when the passengers tried to reinterpret the guidelines the driver had set and make them more palatable and convenient for themselves. 
 
Conversely, others would take the instructions and add more guidelines around each original instruction making it extremely difficult to differentiate what was from the driver and what was of the passengers’ good intentions. In this latter case, however, it eventually developed to a point that the new instructions designed to protect the original instructions became more important than the bus drivers’ conditions.
 
In their eagerness, to protect the original instructions from being broken, they began to place their ideas, which were originally designed, in their mind, to protect the drivers’ instructions as more important. This led to passengers being heavily burdened with the promise of riding a bus their teachers were no longer on. Though they are a part of the passengers the bus was designed for, they spent all their time examining all their new instructions, they did not even realise that they had gotten off the bus. As a result, they were actively, but unknowingly, stopping others who the bus was designed for from getting on.
 
Ultimately, it got to the point where there were very few passengers left on this bus, a remnant of passengers who enjoy the ride and are happy to follow the instructions of the driver and his son. 
 
But this bus was designed to take many passengers, and the bus driver is never happier than when the bus is full. So, to remedy this situation, he put into action a plan for just such an occasion, one that he and his son had prepared in advance before they even built the bus.
 
The bus had a schedule to keep, so to allow passengers to fill the seats, the driver sent his son to go amongst the passengers who had got off the bus and offer them a way to get back on. Now, rather than them having to read all the instructions and try to interpret what was meant by them, as the would-be passengers were being confused by all the ways these instructions had become interpreted, the son went amongst the would-be passengers and showed them what it meant to observe the rules. In doing this, he let them see that they were complicating a simple thing. These rules weren’t a burden, but a practical way to behave when in the presence of the bus driver.
 
The son managed to persuade many to get back on the bus and trained other passengers to go into the world to demonstrate the way needed to get on the bus, the way the son had taught them to follow, understanding and following the rules the way the driver wanted.
 
The news of this bus driver and the bus called Israel spread around the world and many passengers who never considered getting on this bus were persuaded to do so. But, sadly, many of these passengers also fell into the same mindset as so many of the previous passengers and decided to go their own way. 
 
They started to ignore the bus driver and claim the son showed them a different way from that of the bus driver. They rejected the bus drivers’ teachings and directions and said the son gave them a different way, even though the son came and showed them the way to live the drivers recommended lifestyle, which was required to stay on the bus.
 
The bus called Israel and its driver became relegated to a road seen as old and undesirable. One that was full of potholes and no longer maintained. This had become, in the mind of would-be passengers, an old road that was for the previous passengers who existed before the son showed the way. Sadly, the son did show them the way, but they reject that and turned what the son said into something more pleasing and softer for man to follow. A new road that is easy on the back and a smooth simple ride.
 
The bus driver, however, will not be stopping to pick up passengers who do things contrary to the driver and the son who is obedient to his father. The travellers outside the bus all go in directions that suit themselves and can never reach the destination only this special vehicle can manage. Only the driver and his son know the way to the final destination. Those that come alongside the bus called Israel, but who had not previously heard of it, but displaying by action that they listened to the son and want to obey the driver are allowed on.
 
As the bus gets towards the final destination and heads down a road that only this bus can go on, many will start to want to jump on board. They will not look to the driver but the son and say, “we heard everything about you, we went out into the world and sold many tickets for the bus so let us on the bus, please. 
 
We made new roads for the bus to drive on, we built big shiny bus stops for you to stop at and pick up the passengers, we even told our family and friends about you.”. But the son will look sadly at these passengers and say, “I don’t know you; you should have got on the bus and obeyed the rules instead of following your own, I never asked you for new roads or big bus stops. I asked you to follow me and I got on the bus with my father whom I obey”.
 
It’s time to re-examine the requirements of the driver and son to see if we are getting on the bus, being adopted into the family of passengers on the bus called Israel, or are we doing things a different way and expecting the driver to forget his rulings and let us on anyway. 
 
Whose rules will prevail? 
 
Those that want on the bus under their own steam with ideas that suit them, or those of the driver who hold the keys and says how one is to get on the bus and what is expected if we are to remain there.
 
 
 
 
 

​Two people listened to a story. Both people heard the exact same information from beginning to end. But when these two people were tasked with sharing the story with others, many of the details became changed. As a result, both those retelling the story came to different conclusions on what they perceived was said. As a result, the story passed on to others was different from the original, not in major detail, but as this story is retold many times, these little differences add up to the story becoming completely different from the original.
 
How does that happen?
 
There is a well-known game called Chinese whispers. You can have 10 people in a line. You would whisper a short story into the ear of the first and they would whisper it on to the next person in the line and by the time they got to the end of the line, the story can be completely different and bear little or no resemblance to the original story.
 
Why does this happen?
 
Each of us at the time we hear a story are the sum total of all we have learnt throughout our lives in conversations, education, reading and our desires, both fulfilled and unfulfilled. This sets us up to be biased in what we take from a story or something we witness. Not intentionally, but because we have become accustomed to doing this rather than becoming overloaded with a constant barrage of information. However, this does mean that we have to make an effort to examine something from another perspective, especially when it goes against what we are accustomed to.
 
When the police take a statement about an accident or other event from witnesses, the different statements can vary wildly in their description of what happened. This is because the witnesses will have a different perspective on what they saw depending on where they were standing, what they were doing and even what was on their mind at the time. Each person is certain in their own mind as to what they saw. One person can be positive the person involved was wearing a blue shirt and jeans and another just as certain that they were wearing red trousers and a hoodie.
 
When we hear something or see something, we do not always process all the information we receive, but we mentally take cliff notes. We hear or see something that we recognise, and it is that that we tend to focus on. It is not a deliberate act but focusing on the familiar is easier mentally than processing new information. To learn something new we have to focus on the information and realise it may well differ from what we are used to hearing or seeing. To learn we must apply ourselves, in other words, make an effort to examine all the information and not just what we already know and is familiar. This applies to everything from learning a new language to studying Scripture, learning to use a new machine via a manual to learning to cook and become a chef.
 
We come across new information every day, but we only take in a small amount of the information we are faced with, if something does not pique our interest or is unfamiliar, we usually just let it pass by us. This is why law enforcement officers and agents of government organizations are trained in observation and how to keep this constant slew of new information available to repeat back and use at a later date.
 
If this practice of retaining without bias all the information we absorb were natural and easy to all, it would not have to be taught to people as a special tactic that must be honed over time. 
 
For the rest of us we must realise that we are not infallible in our understanding of what we hear, see and understand because of this taking in the bits of information that grab our attention. This does not mean we do not want to learn something new or believe that we are only hearing what we want, but we always automatically focus on the familiar. When something comes along that challenges the familiar, we have a tendency, all of us, to try and justify our position because we do not like to be wrong.
 
Is this pride or fear? 
 
Being wrong because our conventional views are challenged can make us uncomfortable, and as a result, we more often than not, will reject out of hand what is making us uncomfortable or challenging a long-held belief system. This is true of every aspect of our lives. When we are driving a car and we are obeying the law as taught in the highway code and somebody else doesn’t, we have a reaction. They are not doing things the way we were taught they should be done, as a result it instantly gets our “back up”. Even if what they do does not directly affect us, we have our own thoughts on the matter which we will often verbalise or let the horn speak for us.
 
When it comes to scripture and what it says we have two views we must consider. Today when we examine scripture, we do it through the eyes of someone brought up from a western gentile perspective. We do it through the lens of our Greek mindset and culture giving us a preconceived perspective on how we view things. As a result, we pick out the parts when learning that fit in with our worldview.
 
The other is the Judaic view. When the first Jewish believers heard the gospel message it was not new to them or different. It was a familiar message that tied in with the worldview they had been brought up in.
 
Understanding that any perspective is based on our upbringing, culture and social expectations providing us with a mindset that may differ from others will help us become aware of the need to study all the information we receive to come to a correct conclusion. A child brought up in a home that is rampantly anti-Semitic and aryan in its views will congregate with other like-minded people as they grow. This is the worldview that shapes their opinions and what they take from a conversation or something they see. However, a child brought up in a home that has a love for the Jewish people will conversely congregate with others of like mind.
 
Society is complex and has many subsets of views based on the network of friends, education and bias of teachers, especially our universities. This reveals the importance of recognising the different views people have when approaching a topic and what they may take from the information given. There is a cult in India that do not believe in fear. They will not use the breaks on their vehicle when driving and weave madly in and out of the traffic until they reach their destination or crash. To us that seems like lunacy, but to him brought up in that cultural belief it is normal practice. He may even believe that it is everyone else that is wrong.
 
Again, we are all a product of our upbringing and the worldview we have had instilled in us. When we come to Yeshua Messiah, we are to renew our minds, in other words, change our perspective from what we have been taught by our society and worldview to come in line with what scripture declares is correct. The problem is, when we examine from a western perspective, we inherently take from the writings what is familiar. Doing this gives a completely different perspective from those who approach with a Judaic perspective. They take from scripture what is familiar from their worldview. 
 
It is important to remember that the scriptures were given to the Jews by a God who created the Jewish nation and called them His people. He gave the commandments, righteous lifestyle and desire for holiness to these people. As western Christians it is important to understand that we are grafted into people that has been created to worship Adonai. 
 
This does not mean we are to observe rabbinic Judaism or become Jewish as gentiles. But we must come to understand the faith of the people Adonai created and moulded to bring the gospel message to the rest of the world. A very Jewish message with a Jewish Messiah that we are grafted into.

Whenever we read a book, it has a beginning, a middle and an end. As we progress from page one through the rest of the chapters, the story develops, and as a result, we gain a clear picture and representation of what it is the author is trying to convey. 

It doesn’t matter if it is a book explaining the way to build a website from scratch or a novel about a detective solving crimes, to understand the story and development of the plot or procedures required we must start at the beginning. Should we start in the middle, we are missing the developing storyline and left in the position of having to try and make sense of text without the prior information giving outline and context.

When we read a book from the beginning, we are introduced to the characters in play, their location, what it is they do, their background or history, how they interact with other characters, and even the jobs they might have or the reason they behave in a certain way. Without this information the story becomes disjointed and the interpretation of the events by reading from the middle of the book become sporadic and misplaced.

For instance: if the first line you read in the middle of the book says, “He pulled out the gun and instead of shooting, he threw it in the river”. Without knowing the character, the context of this event, who he did not shoot and why we are left in the position of trying to imagine what had occurred previously, we have to try and piece together something that makes sense from the second half of the book. We need to become detectives ourselves using only the context of the half of the book we are reading. If the next line in this book said: “When they saw this, they ran away as fast as they could”. What do we understand of the story? It is, in fact, a bit more confusing. We have no context with which to discern the events and why they are happening.

So, there are only two ways to try and resolve the problems that come along with this:

1.     We try and move on, placing ideas from our mind and experience into the story to try and make sense of the events.

2.     We go back and study the beginning of the book to gain a correct perspective on events to make sense of the story.

The first way leaves the story open to the interpretation of the reader. They would have to try to evaluate the events in some way so that they will make sense. The limits on imagining what has happened and what is intended by the author are infinite. Only limited by the imaginations of the people trying to make sense of a book read from the middle. You could end up with as many as 40,000 or more different versions of the events perceived from the minds of those that continue to study the material from the middle. Despite the many differing opinions of the various people, blindness comes over them leaving them in the position whereby they continue in their efforts to make sense of the story from the middle because it has become a tradition to do so.

Once this position becomes prevalent, the readers will all start vying with each other to make determinations as to who is right and will start to resent others who have a different interpretation. The authors intent has been long left behind at this point and the opinions of the interpreters are debated instead of understanding the books original storyline.

This creates many problems, not so much with a novel or short story, but when a book is giving instructions on how to do something particular, it becomes of major importance. If you do not correctly and in order follow the instructions clearly on how to mix the chemicals for fertilizer, you could end up blowing yourself up instead, as when some of these chemicals are mixed, they become explosive. If you read in the second half of the manual the final list of chemicals needed but have not read the first half on the ratios required, you could literally “blow your mind” trying to figure out the correct mixture.

On the other hand, when the book is read in its entirety, the main concepts of the author are made visible, and though people can dispute some of the conclusions of the author. The meaning remains clear. In any English literature class, books are often read and dissected by the students at the behest of the teacher. Characters are examined and their intent is discussed. There are times when a student will have a differing opinion of the teacher as to which theory is right. Was a particular character losing his mind, or was he calculating and cold? Was the protagonist actually in love with the subject of his desire or trying to control them through manipulation?

So, even when a story is read from the beginning, some disagreement can occur because the authors intent can be questioned. However, this format of reading brings much more clarity and leaves a lot less to the imagination than the former method. Despite readers coming to some differences of opinion over issues explained the book, the authors intent is easier to discern, the story is understood. The novel makes sense, and in the end, it wasn’t the butler who did it after all. With the book on fertilizer manufacturing, all safety protocols and measurements were adhered to and a usable product is produced.

So why call this article “The Next Chapter”?

If we start reading a book from the middle, the picture we try to develop about the intent of the author without background leaves us scrambling for definition. So, by the time we get to the next chapter we have already started to determine what the book is about from our perspective. As a result, the next chapter must be interpreted in light of what we have just read and determined in our minds as to what is correct. The next chapter therefore must reinforce what we have determined, and if it doesn’t we have to change its context to suit our definition. This is often done by allergisation, the practice of trying to draw out what it is believed the author intended to make the pieces of the puzzle fit together. The trouble is, the intent of the author is not fully known because the beginning of the book is neglected.

This method can and does, often, leave a very distorted view far from the authors intended meaning. Especially after the wrong, although good-intentioned manipulation over many years by various people trying to make the text make sense. As a result, it becomes a tradition to interpret the work this way and this technique becomes prevalent. The first part of the book is no longer regarded as relevant and all focus is on the second half of the book with the now newly perceived ideas as to its meaning. The first half of the book and its instructions and the characteristics of the protagonist are deemed unnecessary as a new way has developed.

However, when one reads the entire book and the full sweeping scope of the story is understood; for example, why does that particular building hold such importance for the people? What happens when the protagonist is disobeyed and what are the punishments for that disobedience?  If the storyline in the first half of the book develops a plot where the importance of a certain document is critical in the development of the story at the end of the book, why is it not recognised as important in the second half? The importance of this document is dismissed because it is not understood as relevant anymore. The new storyline developed over the years has succeeded in making the importance of the original document to the story immaterial.

When this happens, the story is no longer the story of the author but a new story, a new way to find an ending that suits the desires of the people trying to find meaning in the second half of the book.

When read in light of the authors intent, we can already perceive the meaning of the next chapter. We read it in light of the information previously building the plot and already provided in the book. If a document was important and is understood to be integral to the story, we see it in everything we see the author writing. He no longer has need by the second half of the book to keep making mention of it and how it is to be used and understood, that was established in the first half of the book.

The same problems can occur when we only read the first half of the book and don’t bother to finish it. The first half prepares us for the end, it builds the picture of what is to come. There are hints and promises of a beautiful ending to the story despite the adversity and hardship the characters go through. By not reading the second half, we never see how the story turns out and the full extent of the capacity of the story.

As a result, we have similar problems as with those that only read the second half. The first half builds the story beautifully, it demonstrates all that is needed to understand the protagonist and what he promises to bring about. Reading only the first half though leaves the reader having to develop in his mind what he thinks will happen in the end. He has read the promises, he has understood the plans laid out bringing the plot together, but the ending is missing. So, he develops an ending according to what he thinks it should be according to the information he has and his imagination.

Like those that only read the second half, he does not have all the information and the conclusions of the authors intended complete story are missed entirely.

To understand the next chapter of any book, we must start at the beginning, understand the concepts and principles the author is bringing out. Come to terms with the plot and trust that the author knows how the book will end and bring it about in a way that surprises, delights and satisfies the reader. An ending without the beginning can leave the reader without a sense of joy because he misunderstood the importance of the document outlined in the first half, resulting in confusion when the end is nothing like they imagined.

The same for those that read only the first half, when the ending comes, it is not what they were imagining, they expected the document and the future it promised to be one way, but it was not, they missed the stories true intent and are also disillusioned with the ending once it is revealed. It didn’t go according to their desire and imagination, not according to the practice of justifying their position through the tradition developed.

When a book is not read in its entirety, understanding can only come by developing a technique of interpretation to justify the preferred half of the book. It then becomes an issue when someone wants to read the whole book and reunite the story. Those reading the first half only reject your conclusions about the books ending because they have decided on an ending themselves.

Those reading only the second half disagree with you because you understand the importance of the document in the story which clarifies the ending. But is disrupts the practices and ideology they have developed rejecting that document as irrelevant and unimportant to their half of the book.

As a reader of the whole book, you become a pariah in the eyes of both sides. You are rocking the boat and when their positions are challenged, they tell you that you are deceived. Using arguments to justify their position from the traditional teachings developed coagulating their perspective into a professed truth beyond the scope of the true story and the authors intent.

Read the whole book and get the full story. Don’t let others who do not do this lead you into a position where you are led away from knowing the true intent of the author. Know the first half of the book and how it was intended for all the people reading it to understand, so the second half is understood in the correct context and the ending makes more sense.

Because of the promotion of the microchip in the news lately, I have been receiving dozens of emails or messages through Facebook etc all declaring some different views on what the  Mark of the beast is.
Some declaring unflinchingly the mark is the new Covid-19 immunization, yet other declare just as certainly that the mark is all about taking the microchip. However, I also remember a few years back that the mark of the beast was definitely the barcode system as it was introduced followed by the chip and pin cards in the banking system. These and many other developments over the years have been declared as the mark of the beast by both well meaning believers and conspiracy theorists alike. Yet so far none have panned out - Why?

Because when getting excited over the next thing to be classed as a mark of the beast, scripture is bypassed for an enthusiasm over an exciting theory, one that those followers can say “we have special knowledge” and we will tell you it with no uncertainty despite scriptural ignorance on the issue.
It appears people would rather listen to the conspiracy theorists or biblically ignorant than actually check what scripture itself says.

Lets examine what the book of Revelations has to say on the issue:

• Rev 13:17 (TS2009)  and that no one should be able to buy or sell except he that has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
  
• Rev 14:11 (TS2009)  “And the smoke of their torture goes up forever and ever. And they have no rest day or night, those worshiping the beast and his image, also if anyone receives the mark of his name.”
  
• Rev 15:2 (TS2009)  And I saw like a sea of glass mixed with fire, and those overcoming the beast and his image and his mark and the number of his name, standing on the sea of glass, holding harps of Elohim.
• Rev 16:2 (TS2009)  And the first went and poured out his bowl upon the earth, and an evil and wicked sore came upon the men, those having the mark of the beast and those worshiping his image.
  

Rev 19:20 (TS2009)  And the beast was seized, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he led astray those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. The two were thrown alive into the lake of fire burning with sulfur.

• Rev 20:4 (TS2009)  And I saw thrones – and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them – and the lives of those who had been beheaded because of the witness they bore to ישוע and because of the Word of Elohim, and who did not worship the beast, nor his image, and did not receive his mark upon their foreheads or upon their hands. And they lived and reigned with Messiah for a thousand years
  

The first thing to notice about the mark of the beast, as I have highlighted in the scriptures above, is that it is to do with worship and a specific mark that people will recognize to prove this worship of his image. This mark is something that people take to prove they are in league or agreement with the anti-Messiah. Without this mark they will not be able to buy or sell or be allowed to in any way perform acts commerce.

Many generations since the the Messiah left us with the promise of His return, groups of people have always found something in their society to be classed as the mark of the beast. Some believed the Catholic Church was the mark of the beast, others the symbol of the cross among the plethora of things declared as promoting the number of the beast. Even some major companies logos were seen as proof these companies were in league with the anti-Messiah and their logo may even be the mark.

For this Mark to have any meaning, the anti-Messiah must already be revealed and people must be making a personal choice to accept his mark and follow his ways. Having an injection to fight a virus is not the mark of the beast. Nor is new technology such as the microchip. The microchip might possibly be used in the future to decide who can buy and sell, but of itself is not the mark taken by choice to worship the anti-Messiah, who has not yet been revealed. Once we have the cashless society the microchip may or may not be a part of that system. New and improved technology is constantly being revealed in this age of great scientific leaps. The chip, like the barcode theory may well be obsolete in a year or two.
Of course it is possible that the microchip will be in use and essential for commerce as it keeps track of where we are and what we spend. But the same people screaming conspiracy, and declaring this is the mark, are the same people who buy online, have store cards and chip and pin bank cards all of which provide as much info, and perhaps more with our online presence, than the microchip ever will. We have phones tracking our every movement, with people using ApplePay etc to purchase goods. The ever changing face of technology, who can keep up with it let alone make sweeping declarations of certainty as regards the worship of the beast with out the worship part.

I would say taking the microchip, the injection against Covid-19 or shopping at a store that may or may not have a dodgy logo is a matter of conscience and is at this time certainly not the mark of the beast.

If the mark of the beast is to be anything, it is likely to be a tattoo or skin marking. One people take to prove their loyalty to the beast. I say this because scripture warns us as believers not to have tattoos. Tattoos have become so common place and a part of society for both male and female, it is likely the mark will be something that is seen as an innocuous tattoo acceptable by the many.

Let’s stop following and chasing conspiracy theories and spend more time studying the word that gives us the truth of the topic and not guesswork people declare as fact.