Revelation 17...???

a reply to: the2ofusr1

So do you have prior witnesses to any of the NT text ? Or is all you have is later text saying that the first witnesses were wrong ?

What you're asking is out of context to what I'm saying. None of the manuscript fragments that were used to compile the gospels of the New Testament were signed by their name sake. That's factual.

Can the later text be the base on which Christian faith and doctrine stands ?

Which denomination? Apparently not if you're faith is Gnostic Christian, or could it?

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: vethumanbeing

You are assuming that the Creator has DNA ....word on the street is that He is Sprite .

7-Up; as Sprite's twin brother (upper and lower worlds defined as the equator); father Coca-Cola gave them all *Soda reactive Gases Air and Sea* control over additional depth, land or water environs. Coca-Cola distributed the DNA (sons not to be trusted).

a reply to: windword

No I am asking about the NT text we have today in a standard Bible . You must have a set of text to compare it to in order to develop a doctrine . One poster brought up reincarnation which is not even in the lexicon of NT manuscripts but you must have something to compare with it in order to figure out the true from the false .

a reply to: vethumanbeing

So does He do the reincarnation thing ? or is that just for us poor humans stuck in a perpetual circular circuit of never enduringness ? And if so when did it start and how ?

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: vethumanbeing So does He do the reincarnation thing ? or is that just for us poor humans stuck in a perpetual circular circuit of never enduringness ? And if so when did it start and how ?

The farming of human emotion began by accident; the energy was there to be collected but by a series of accidents refined itself. When it was noticed that it was so pure in a wild form and needed no refining process; it was then put into production, gardens were created as experiments. Humans placed with animals in order to eat each other; with a vegetation componant humans could consume both VS the natural elements of nature that could destroy any habitat. Emotion caused by tragedy or a sudden loss of life conflict produced a food source (wave form energy that could be collected) and sold to those with the most money or trade value product. This could be understood today in this way; any transaction which produces energy from conflict; Wars, murder, corporate mergers, religious dogma and has value will be sold or traded for a profit given supply and demand favors that transaction.

a reply to: the2ofusr1

I hope you can watch videos. It doesn't seem as if you watched the first one I posted on the schism of the early church.





Bart Ehrman is much more generous with the benefit the doubt than I am.

a reply to: windword

You know Dr. Ehrman is like the Anti-Christ to most Christians right?

a reply to: the2ofusr1

Windword is correct.

The 4 canonical Gospels were anonymous works. The 4 Gospels that we know today as Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, didn’t have those name inscriptions on them originally. Those names were only added much later…

This is no secret, it's historical fact…


- JC

a reply to: Akragon

LOL..

He does ride a fine line! But, like I said, he's far more generous with "the benefit of the doubt" than I am.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

Originally posted vethumanbeing
This a "who forgives God scenario".

Someone set up a system we all co-exist within as material/spiritual beings.

Within this system are built in gains and losses (consumption=growth and loss of life by others). Wave lengths describe energy forms that can be consumed by those designed to eat those provided to (the higher pecking order).

Our emotional output is the food produced; it is collected and sold. This is why Karma is such a terrible thing; roped in and stuck in the hamster wheel of reincarnation producing continuous negative energy consumed by our creator beings. Why negative? not sure, but is on the menu. Not sure the love waveform is digestible by those evil beings controlling this pattern.

This reminds of those “gather round the camp fire” type moments, bring the marshmallows and wine…while someone recites a story yet to be told…

Well, Positive is on the menu too…and there’s another dish named “confusion”, people really love that one…oh and then there’s “ignorance” that’s a real delicacy…Is there something I’m forgetting, oh yeah “forgetfulness” that’s the chefs special…lol


- JC

originally posted by: Joecroft
a reply to: vethumanbeing

vhb:
This a "who forgives God scenario". Someone set up a system we all co-exist within as material/spiritual beings.
Within this system are built in gains and losses (consumption=growth and loss of life by others). Wave lengths describe energy forms that can be consumed by those designed to eat those provided to (the higher pecking order). Our emotional output is the food produced; it is collected and sold. This is why Karma is such a terrible thing; roped in and stuck in the hamster wheel of reincarnation producing continuous negative energy consumed by our creator beings. Why negative? not sure, but is on the menu. Not sure the love waveform is digestible by those evil beings controlling this pattern.

Joecroft: This reminds of those “gather round the camp fire” type moments, bring the marshmallows and wine…while someone recites a story yet to be told…

Well, Positive is on the menu too…and there’s another dish named “confusion”, people really love that one…oh and then there’s “ignorance” that’s a real delicacy…Is there something I’m forgetting, oh yeah “forgetfulness” that’s the chefs special.

I love those moments; experiencing for the first time a campfire marshmallow roast (Someone is eating the energy being produced simoultaneously) in that innocent joyous moment. Well said Joe; I know the "positive" is on the menu because negatives will not win in this perfect prototype garden; as would put the system into imbalance. This system is based upon growth/progression not only of the material but also of the soul/spirit type. The negative is a primative kickstart or nudge to cause change; tiresome/I have outgrown those antiquated silly machinations.

originally posted by: Joecroft
But people follow their leaders and Kings, so effectively and collectively it is “Us” and “We”, because “we” go along with it…

It is specifically the power of leadership (the BASILEIA, the "royal power") that is being handed over to the Beast. What we're getting here is a picture of how domination of the world works- not by direct rule, but through a network of client rulers.

And like I said in my last reply, one can say the Whole world is being deceived by something, whilst not including themselves along with that deception.

But you include yourself when you say "we", especially when you do so unnecessarily and refuse to abandon it.

When black Americans complain about the hisory of slavery, do they describe the old slave-owners as "we"? Do they not rather say "THEY used to enslave US"?

All these people in Revelation ch17 are setting themselves against "the saints". That is the whole point of the picture. That is what they are being deceived to do. Therefore "the saints" cannot be counted amongst them, and will not call them "we". The saints are not associates in their own persecution.

a reply to: windword

I suppose they could have named them what ever .I suppose they could have not divided them into chapters and verses .The Bible today is what it is and as far as Ehrman goes ....

Ehrman and Metzger state in that book that we can have a high degree of confidence that we can reconstruct the original text of the New Testament, the text that is in the Bibles we use, because of the abundance of textual evidence we have to compare. The variations are largely minor and don’t obscure our ability to construct an accurate text. The 4th edition of this work was published in 2005 – the same year Ehrman published Misquoting Jesus, which relies on the same body of information and offers no new or different evidence to state the opposite conclusion. Here’s what Ehrman says in an interview found in the appendix of Misquoting Jesus (p. 252): Bruce Metzger is one of the great scholars of modern times, and I dedicated the book to him because he was both my inspiration for going into textual criticism and the person who trained me in the field. I have nothing but respect and admiration for him. And even though we may disagree on important religious questions – he is a firmly committed Christian and I am not – we are in complete agreement on a number of very important historical and textual questions. If he and I were put in a room and asked to hammer out a consensus statement on what we think the original text of the New Testament probably looked like, there would be very few points of disagreement – maybe one or two dozen places out of many thousands. The position I argue for in ‘Misquoting Jesus’ does not actually stand at odds with Prof. Metzger’s position that the essential Christian beliefs are not affected by textual variants in the manuscript tradition of the New Testament. So why does Ehrman give one impression to the general public and the opposite to the academic world? Could it be because he can get away with casting doubt on the New Testament to an uninformed public, but not to his academic peers?

crossexamined.org...

a reply to: the2ofusr1

I love the late Dr. Metzger

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: BO XIAN

Revelation uses symbolism, it isn't meant to be taken literally.

With that thought in mind, and clearing your mind for a moment of all the stuff that has been posted about Babylon the Great so far in this thread...

Revelation—Its Grand Climax At Hand! (pdf, page 236):

...
We read, however, that ‘by her spiritistic practice all the nations were misled.’ (Revelation 18:23) This makes it clear that the great harlot must be a worldwide religious entity.
Which religious entity? Is she the Roman Catholic Church, as some have maintained? Or is she all of Christendom? No, she must be even larger than these if she is to mislead all the nations. She is, in fact, the entire world empire of false religion. Her origin in the mysteries of Babylon is shown in that many Babylonish doctrines and practices are common to religions around the earth. For example, belief in the inherent immortality of the human soul, in a hell of torment, and in a trinity of gods is to be found in most Oriental religions as well as in the sects of Christendom. False religion, spawned more than 4,000 years ago in the ancient city of Babylon, has developed into the modern monstrosity that is called, appropriately, Babylon the Great.

Indicating the non-Christian origin of many of apostate Christendom’s doctrines, ceremonies, and practices, 19th-century Roman Catholic cardinal John Henry Newman wrote in his Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine:

“The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holydays and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on the fields; sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the Kyrie Eleison [the song “Lord, Have Mercy”], are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by their adoption into the Church.”

Rather than sanctify such idolatry, “Jehovah the Almighty” admonishes Christians: “Get out from among them, and separate yourselves, . . . and quit touching the unclean thing.”—2 Corinthians 6:14-18.

a reply to: the2ofusr1

This is why I say that Bart Erhman gives more "benefit of the doubt" than I do.

I suppose the late Dr. Metzger and Dr Erhman COULD have composed a new New Testament that they thought was reliable, but they didn't.

a reply to: windword

But there are other scholars who are putting the effort into creating such works .I am quite sure then some of Erhman's and Metzer's works will help contribute to the projects . If they both shared the same sentiments that it was possible then why not at least try ....At this point it's not like it will be a whole lot different the the many versions we have today which have about a 90% agreement with each other .

a reply to: the2ofusr1

The point is, the argument that the gospels we have today were actually written by eye witnesses to the life, times, death and resurrection of Jesus, and therefore shouldn't be questioned, is erroneous. We don't know who wrote the words that are pieced together to form the gospels. But we do know that they were written way after the supposed advent of Jesus the Nazarene.

a reply to: windword

So are you saying nobody knew Jesus or seen Him die and no one seen the resurrected Jesus ? The writer of the Gospel of John tells a different story which does not contradict the other NT books . I can say that because I see it but am not saying that you can see it .Even Bart seems to come across as a walking contradiction who talks out of both sides of his face ....Could it be that that is all it is or is there something else that might explain Barts book ? $$ ...or some kind of a hate on for Christianity .....hard to say ..

My spirit tells me Hillary is the Harlot who rides the beast. She will be our next president.

Obviously any church you go to will have a minister preaching the "word" as he sees it. Hence my interpretation may not be the consensus but that's what I feel about Revelation 17 intuitively.