Book of Revalation

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote]cloakmanor wrote:

[quote]farmerson12 wrote:
Agreed. For some reason many tie America too much with the biblical references. A few people I have talked to believe the U.S(as we know it) may not even be around when final pieces are in line. Of course thats all skepticism. [/quote]

Many American Christians have mistakenly fused theological interpretation with nationalism.[/quote]

Are you speaking about the creation of Israel and the ideas that it must be around for apocalypse to be fulfilled?

62

[quote]BBriere wrote:

[quote]cloakmanor wrote:

[quote]farmerson12 wrote:
Agreed. For some reason many tie America too much with the biblical references. A few people I have talked to believe the U.S(as we know it) may not even be around when final pieces are in line. Of course thats all skepticism. [/quote]

Many American Christians have mistakenly fused theological interpretation with nationalism.[/quote]

Are you speaking about the creation of Israel and the ideas that it must be around for apocalypse to be fulfilled?[/quote]

I would follow that belief far before I would agree that the U.S would be around during the end of days. An Israel state, I would say possibly.

63
  1. About 96 C.E. while exiled at the Island of Patmos
  2. Apostle John
  3. There are still some prophecies that are unfulfilled.{examples… the battle of Armagedon babylon the great destroyed}
64

[quote]farmerson12 wrote:

[quote]BBriere wrote:

[quote]cloakmanor wrote:

[quote]farmerson12 wrote:
Agreed. For some reason many tie America too much with the biblical references. A few people I have talked to believe the U.S(as we know it) may not even be around when final pieces are in line. Of course thats all skepticism. [/quote]

Many American Christians have mistakenly fused theological interpretation with nationalism.[/quote]

Are you speaking about the creation of Israel and the ideas that it must be around for apocalypse to be fulfilled?[/quote]

I would follow that belief far before I would agree that the U.S would be around during the end of days. An Israel state, I would say possibly.[/quote]

Well, I’m not arguing that America has anything to do with the end of times. What about Israel’s rebellion against God and his promise to take the land from them until they turn back to him?

65

[quote]Vonamberg wrote:

  1. About 96 C.E. while exiled at the Island of Patmos
  2. Apostle John
  3. There are still some prophecies that are unfulfilled.{examples… the battle of Armagedon babylon the great destroyed}[/quote]

So you feel that some of the prophecies have been fulfilled? Which ones?

66

Flame away, but it would much easier to believe in any religions if there was some kind of evidence or some kind of interaction in the last thousand years or so. To me the story is set up so people never lose faith b/c when you do the apocalypse comes.

It like me telling you to follow the rainbow and at the end you get a pot of gold(go to heaven) Now, you can not deviate from this path or the pot disappears. When you ask how long is the path? My answer is “Well, no one knows.” Believe me though there is a pot of gold. Do as I say and you surely will receive it. You have to blindly follow what I say or risk losing it when it may not even exist.

And for this one world gov talk. Yes, it’s gonna happen at some point. People have known that forever. Eventually as one country conquers another then another it will happen. The conquering has slowed down in present times, but it is happening. Everything is based off a corporate structure and as corporations eat one another the number dwindle and each one that lasts becomes bigger.

Soooo, eventually there will be a one world gov.

This is not meant to bash religion, but I need something concrete to see and feel.

67

[quote]dnlcdstn wrote:
Flame away, but it would much easier to believe in any religions if there was some kind of evidence or some kind of interaction in the last thousand years or so. To me the story is set up so people never lose faith b/c when you do the apocalypse comes.

It like me telling you to follow the rainbow and at the end you get a pot of gold(go to heaven) Now, you can not deviate from this path or the pot disappears. When you ask how long is the path? My answer is “Well, no one knows.” Believe me though there is a pot of gold. Do as I say and you surely will receive it. You have to blindly follow what I say or risk losing it when it may not even exist.

And for this one world gov talk. Yes, it’s gonna happen at some point. People have known that forever. Eventually as one country conquers another then another it will happen. The conquering has slowed down in present times, but it is happening. Everything is based off a corporate structure and as corporations eat one another the number dwindle and each one that lasts becomes bigger.

Soooo, eventually there will be a one world gov.

This is not meant to bash religion, but I need something concrete to see and feel.[/quote]

Find a thread on here discussing religion (or something similar) and I can address some things there. Like Bible Contradictions 2.0 for example. I just don’t want to derail this thread.

68

[quote]forbes wrote:
Find a thread on here discussing religion (or something similar) and I can address some things there. Like Bible Contradictions 2.0 for example. I just don’t want to derail this thread.[/quote]

Done and done.

69

[quote]haney1 wrote:<<< 1. I told you that what you thought preterist think it means is wrong.
2. This view is one of the oldest views that the Church has held on that passage. Only in the 19th century did the view you are familiar with become popular. In fact several times in Church history the current popular view was considered heretical in the various forms that it showed up in.
3. It doesn’t matter to me if you believe any of this. It only matters that I live out what I believe. Which is nothing more than what Jesus is quoted as saying the two greatest commands are.
4. I never said it was right in a sense. I am applying basic laws or interpretation (which would apply to any ancient document, not just the Bible) and trying to understand what is being said. IE. Jesus lived in the first century so His hyperbole, and slang would be first Century. Go to any first level Bible study class and they will all give you defined rules for understanding the Bible. The problem is almost no one goes to one of those classes. So you have a lot of Biblically illiterate people that are giving you an isagesis interpretation and don’t know how to give an exegesis interpretation. I understand your complaint and feel the same way.
[/quote]Amen. Right down the line.

70

[quote]dk44 wrote:
For those interested (Disclaimer: It Is About Islam) this is a pretty interesting site.

Nuts how so much of Islam/Christianity seem to have the same ideals from different perspectives, yet many claim that the 2 religions share the same God.[/quote]

They do, Islam just doesn’t have a full picture of G-d. Oh, and Fatima (Mo’s famous daughter) became a Christian, whoop whoop.

71

This stuff is too heavy for a glance over. I’ll come back another day.

72

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
This stuff is too heavy for a glance over. I’ll come back another day.[/quote]

I would like to get your input as Catholics were given the most credit for the creation of the Preterist viewpoint. The Protestant reformers like Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli apparently came up with the Historicist viewpoint, but I was always taught in church a very Futurist take on Revelation.

73

[quote]haney1 wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]BBriere wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:
Where does the anti-christ fit in? Isn’t there supposed to be some guy who comes along “supposedly” helping people and leads all of the Christians to their deaths? And by deaths I mean God takes them back to heaven or what not? Is that the basis of the whole anti-christ schtick? [/quote]

It depends on your interpretation of Revelation. Futurists believe that the Anti-Christ will arise at the end of times and lead many toward disobeying God. Historicists, such as Martin Luther and many church reformers, believed the papacy to be the Anti-Christ. [/quote]

I don’t care about WHO is the antichrist. I’m asking what the antichrist is supposed to do. Was I hitting the gist of it? He is supposed to rise up and lead the people in the final days - only he winds up leading the Christians to death(return to their lord in heaven), no? I’m not asking for “interpretation” I’m asking what the hell your scripture says… Is this what it describes? Every single source I find that is what it says… And recalling my last reading of revelation that is what I remember. I’m asking you guys because I assume you know your holy book better than I… Why can’t I get a good answer? If I must rephrase the question to avoid the “Well different people interpret it differently” lack of an answer - is this how YOU believe the antichrist? Another thing, is the antichrist essential to this revelation prophecy? If so why is he not a focal point in any of this discussion? Is he not the catalyst?
[/quote]

According to the pre and post tribulational view, the Antichrist is supposed to usher in world peace for 7 years (more specifically peace with Israel). In the middle of the 7 years (so 3 1/2 years later) he breaks that peace treaty and forces the world to follow him. The world is to recieve a mark, either on their forehead or wrist, and this mark is the name or number of this person’s name. Anyone who doesn’t have it cannot buy or sell, or just may be put to death. He will claim to be God, sitting in the temple found in Jerusalem. Stuff happens…Christ returns, judges the world, and sentences the followers of the antichrist and unregenerate Christians. Believers remain on Earth and rule with Christ for a thousand years, while Satan is bound in Hell for a thousand years. Then the battle of Armageddon takes place, Satan is released and conjures up an army to fight against Christ and his army of believers and angels. Satan loses, and him an his army go back to hell for eternity. The dead rise and they are judged. Believers spend eternity with Christ and unbelievers go to hell. Then the earth is destroyed.

This is basically the pre/post tribulational view (I may have gotten a few things wrong about this view). It doesn’t flow well and doesn’t fit scriptural teachings. [/quote]

Oh okay, forbes. The way I always heard the story was that the antichrist do whatever antichrist shit he has to do then God would return and take all of his people back to heaven. In your accounting though where do all the Christians die and return to heaven? Does god kill them all? Or does god just magically ascend them all to heaven with him? I’m lost at that point.

And the antichrist is not mentioned in revelation? Is the antichrist at all pivotal to the revelation prophecies? Or is this some weird extrapolation made by post biblical christians? I’m kinda really lost here.
[/quote]

Your inline with most Christians view today. Those ideas were made popular by a man Darby in the early 19th century.

The beast is mentioned in Revelation in chapter 13. The anti-Christ(s) is mentioned in other books. most people think the anti-Christ(s) is the beast. I find no reason to think they are the same other than someone trying to make a Bible prophecy fit with what they want to believe.

There is also a reference to the man of sin, and the abomination that causes desolation. Modern Christians think all of those refer to the anti-Christ or something he will do.
[/quote]

Darby is a horrible Revelation’s scholar.

74

[quote]dnlcdstn wrote:
Flame away, but it would much easier to believe in any religions if there was some kind of evidence or some kind of interaction in the last thousand years or so. To me the story is set up so people never lose faith b/c when you do the apocalypse comes.
[/quote]

Become Catholic, we have Marian apparitions all the time. Japan had one back in 87-88 I believe.

75

[quote]BBriere wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
This stuff is too heavy for a glance over. I’ll come back another day.[/quote]

I would like to get your input as Catholics were given the most credit for the creation of the Preterist viewpoint. The Protestant reformers like Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli apparently came up with the Historicist viewpoint, but I was always taught in church a very Futurist take on Revelation. [/quote]

Give me a bit to put something together, right now I’m doing a stupid Art History project. Blah. Who cares about Proto-Renaissance art anyway. :wink:

76

Of all the books in the bible, that one I think they should have left out. My opinion on the matter is that everybody is wrong about it. Until further notice, that’s my stance. Everybody is wrong about revelation. People have done a great deal of damage based on that book alone. I would say that most of whacko pseudo Christian weirdness is based on revelation. That’s my opinion and that’s all it is…

77

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]dk44 wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]dk44 wrote:
I have seen a lot of stuff pointing towards Islam being the cloak of satan,[/quote]

What. The. Mother. Fuck…

Your fucking shitting me right? Your fucking kidding right? Your fucking joking right?
[/quote]

Dude, please don’t ruin another fucking thread with this shit. Yes there are multiple cases of people pointing to Islam. Just like they did with the Nazis, and many others. I said I just found it interesting. Fucking Relax. [/quote]

I misinterpreted that as your opinion.

But I’ll be sure to “ruin” this thread when I find it fit to chime in. You must have some weak opinions if they can’t stand up to some good ol’ fashion devil’s advocating… I’m doing you a fucking charity by giving you that juxtaposition. [/quote]

Well I’ll be fuckin’ damned!

78

[quote]pat wrote:
Of all the books in the bible, that one I think they should have left out. My opinion on the matter is that everybody is wrong about it. Until further notice, that’s my stance. Everybody is wrong about revelation. People have done a great deal of damage based on that book alone. I would say that most of whacko pseudo Christian weirdness is based on revelation. That’s my opinion and that’s all it is…[/quote]

I would say without a doubt that Revelation is definitely one of the most abused books by the doomsday preachers and their like. I think there is a lot of symbolism in the book that is easily misinterpreted and can be easily used to mislead. That being said, I think coming from John that it is a very relevant book, however, I think that if you focused on the Gospels and the Epistles then you have a far better understanding of Christianity than jumping straight to Revelation. Strangely enough, as a kid the first book of the Bible I read all the way through was Revelation. I think it was just the facination of the end times imagery.

79

[quote]pat wrote:
Of all the books in the bible, that one I think they should have left out. My opinion on the matter is that everybody is wrong about it. Until further notice, that’s my stance. Everybody is wrong about revelation. People have done a great deal of damage based on that book alone. I would say that most of whacko pseudo Christian weirdness is based on revelation. That’s my opinion and that’s all it is…[/quote]

Dude… WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON!!! No I’m not being over dramatic either… Isn’t this your mother fucking holy book? Is this not the fucking word of God? What I just read was absolutely positively blasphemy… Are you going to Christian hell now?

Super seriously now, how the fuck can you call this book the word of god then try to play editor for god… If god didn’t want revelation in the bible it wouldn’t be there. Now leave us real Christians to discuss the end of man as told by our god.

80

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
Of all the books in the bible, that one I think they should have left out. My opinion on the matter is that everybody is wrong about it. Until further notice, that’s my stance. Everybody is wrong about revelation. People have done a great deal of damage based on that book alone. I would say that most of whacko pseudo Christian weirdness is based on revelation. That’s my opinion and that’s all it is…[/quote]

Dude… WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON!!! No I’m not being over dramatic either… Isn’t this your mother fucking holy book? Is this not the fucking word of God? What I just read was absolutely positively blasphemy… Are you going to Christian hell now?

Super seriously now, how the fuck can you call this book the word of god then try to play editor for god… If god didn’t want revelation in the bible it wouldn’t be there. Now leave us real Christians to discuss the end of man as told by our god. [/quote]

The Book of Revelation was one of the most debated books in the Bible and was actually omitted during the Council of Laodicea which set the Biblical canon in 364. It wasn’t until 397 and the Council of Carthage that it was reluctantly accepted. The main argument was over it’s true meaning due to its heavy use of symbolism. There were also arguments over its authorship and the date it was written. These are all still things that are debated among Christian circles. That’s more or less what this thread is about. When the book was written, there was no code or guide to go by to make sure people interpreted right or wrong. It was mostly accepted because it provided a logical end to the Bible: the return of Christ, the destruction of satan, and the rebuilding of heaven on Earth.