Revelations

Hi All!

I am up tonight reading the Bible, i really don't know why, but its been awhile, but i wanted to read Revelations with an open mind.
So i read Revelations 17, (The Woman on the Beast), and Revelations 18 (The Fall of Babylon).

In Revelations 18 i had a nice, Revelation!
ok, ok, serious here now.
Is it just me or,

is this God's vengence on Islam?

and in 18.9
"When the kings of the earth who commited adultery with her and shared her luxury see the smoke of her burning, they will weep and mourn over her."

I see this as oil, strange huh?

maybe its just too late or maybe i can see clearly, but either way,

share what you feel about this.

Thanks.

~BWBT~

very much as the words of the q'uoran by people who commit the acts they do...
can i judge, no...
do i want the world to move into righteousness yes...(sorry about the spelling)
does it take sacrifice maybe...
but do people make the choice or are they told to make them?....
hmmm, thats the delimma...
are people inderectly making choices that create injustice?....
maybe so maybe not...
in the end it all balances with such beautiful harmony...

Originally posted by bigsage
very much as the words of the q'uoran by people who commit the acts they do...
can i judge, no...
do i want the world to move into righteousness yes...(sorry about the spelling)
does it take sacrifice maybe...
but do people make the choice or are they told to make them?....
hmmm, thats the delimma...
are people inderectly making choices that create injustice?....
maybe so maybe not...
in the end it all balances with such beautiful harmony...

dont mind me asking, but , then you feel that the revelations are something that happened already? future? or are just more/less a story of good v.s. evil?

we have different eyes.... BeingWatchedByThem,

the same verse, could be understood to mean USA
as the harlot, as she seduced the kings & merchants who fornicated with her, & partook in unseemly profits & seeking pleasures & luxuries...[stock manipulations, arms dealings, duplicity with israel v arabs, etc] -->
All manner of treachery, degeneracy....

IF NOT the American dream -turned evil, sinister,decadent
then-> some sons of Ishmail, could be the scions of evil.

WHO KNOWS??

we are told to 'come out of her' or 'come out of egypt' (symbology)??

the power is stabalized and in the eyes of the few who dont recgonize that it is being played out on a global scale...

Some say Revelations was written to Christians in code (i.e symbolism so the Roman Empire wouldn't catch on.) about the evil Roman Empire, since at the time Revelations was written it was a bad time for being Christian, namely persecutions. Any thoughts?

Interesting...

That people think that when speaking of past miracles...the book should be believed verbatum.... But when speaking of future events...it's all metaphoric... I've always been fascinated by that... Revelations was intended to scare the audience of the time, into being faithful... Read it... I'd say the writers did a pretty damned good job! Sort of ancient Stephen Kings and Dean Koontzes.....

As a prophetic book, the Book of Revelation is one of the easiest to unlock. But since it speeks of the judgement of the church and the Western civilisation you get so much svada from priests and monks who still doesn't want to agree with the account they're studying. Babylon is Rome or more precise: the Vatican. It is even reveiled within Revelation itself. She serves wine of agony (try read what you agree to before you enter a Catholic communion, it's a tract with Satan, a Pax Satanum, but no Catholic would ever admit that his great grandmother is in the dark side of Hades because of the way she worshipped and what they did in the name of the Lord), she is spiritually adulterous (praying to everything she can think of except Elohim YHWH who is the victorious YesHuWaH, the name of Jesus and the Hebrew word for Salvation). She will be destroyed twise (C�sar Nero did it the first time, I bet German, French and Italian neo-nazis will do it the second time), she is built uppon seven hills (just like Rome has always been) and so on. When will you ever open your history books and see for yourself what has happened so you can take heed at what is about to happen! The UN is the Cyrus. The EU is the C�sar. The US is the Pharao. It's not about peoples, faces, ancient nations and so on, it's their wisdom and acheivements. Babylon gave way to the Medes and the Persians who gave way to the Greeks who in their turn handed their power over to Rome. If you study Daniel, you'll see that these four empires are likened with four beasts who have seven heads and ten horns. And there is an eighth too, the AntiChrist: The highest priest of the Lord. Known to the rest of us as the Papacy: Coronator of despots and satans, protector of violent men and killer of the innocent

Blessings,
Mikromarius

*cough*
bullshyte
*cough*

You got a lot of issues to work out Mikro, don't be so vindictive or judgemental please.

I'm not being vidictive. I state the facts that you ignore as shyte. I have nothing personal against the Church, I'm not a bitter man who am raging at my former oppressors. I simply understand the language of prophecy quite well and with my well equiped brain I am neither ignorant towards the ways of the loosers in biblical prophecy. All of them have some important things in common: They have persecuted the Jews and have worshipped idols and Ba'al. All of them. Have you ever wondered why history repeats itself again and again? Give me a sign and I'll explain it to you very simple.

The biggest problem of the Vatican is that according to their own rolls the Peace Millennium ended with the collapse of the Holy Roman Empire. Now all they have to do is to wait for the great war their released "Satan" will invoke so they can bring down fire from heaven. Just sad for them that the AntiChrist will do this 1000 years before Jesus does it. But you don't see what implications this would lead to do you?

The Catholic Church bends bananas in Hell. Period. The souls of the elect screams for justice, and I, well, I observe it.

Blessings,
Mikromarius

You are just bent by Protestant propaganda, nothing more. A lot of fundies twist the words of the Bible to suit their beliefs and agendas. They have no authority to do so. Don't hate because that is one of the ways to get a first class ticket to the hot spot.

BTW its your ignorant, not you ignorant.

I'll refute your claims of the "Whore" in a bit.

The Hills Refute
Some fundies argue that the Whore "is a city built on seven hills," which protestants identify as the seven hills of ancient Rome. This argument is based on Revelation 17:9, which states that the woman sits on seven mountains.

The Greek word in this passage is horos. In the Bible, there are sixty-five occurrences of this word in the New Testament and ONLY three are rendered "hill" by the King James Version. The other sixty-two are translated to "mountain" or "mount." Modern Bibles have similar number too. If the passage states that the Whore sits on "seven mountains," it could refer to anything. Mountains are used a lot in biblical symbols, often symbolizing whole kingdoms (cf. Ps. 68:15; Dan. 2:35; Amos 4:1, 6:1; Obad. 8�21). The Whore�s seven mountains might be seven kingdoms she reigns over, or the y might represent seven kingdoms with which she has something in common.

The number seven often represents completeness in the Bible. If so, the seven mountains might signify that the Whore reigns over all Earth�s kingdoms.

Even if we accept that the word horos should be translated literally as "hill" in this passage, it still does not narrow us down to Rome. Other cities have been built on seven hills as well.

Even if they are talking about Rome, here is a question about the Rome context. Which Rome are we talking about, the pagan Rome or Christian Rome? Pagan Rome is more likely.

There is a hugh difference between Rome and Vatican City in itself. This is where trouble begins for the Protestants, Vatican City isn't built on seven hills, but only one. It is called vatican hill. Now this hill is not one of the seven hills on which Rome was constructed. The hills that Rome WAS built are on the east side of the Tiber river while vatican hill is on the west.

For further reading go to this article about the "Whore" It will clear up a lot of misinterpretations Mik.

www.whyprophets.com...




[Edited on 10-15-2003 by Cearbhall]

Originally posted by Cearbhall
You are just bent by Protestant propaganda, nothing more. A lot of fundies twist the words of the Bible to suit their beliefs and agendas. They have no authority to do so. Don't hate because that is one of the ways to get a first class ticket to the hot spot.

What's with your stigma? So I'm a protestant now? Hehe. Soon you'll go away and call me a Jew or a Muslim like so many before you. I know a person who walks mostly like a duck, he even looks and talks like a duck, but he isn't a duck no more that you are. It's simply me who thinks he looks and acts a bit duckish.

BTW its your ignorant, not you ignorant.

Verrywell?

I'll refute your claims of the "Whore" in a bit.

Well, since I've been around the block more than once about these things, I have saved a little candy for last (but I can bet a fiver you don't get it though).

One of the most important clues, appart from Rome being built uppon seven hills, is in her name. Rome got her name from Romulus, one of two twins born out of wedlock, when Amulius dressed out as Mars the god of war, raped their mother Rhea who by the way was his own niece. When the boys were born on August 7, 771 BC, their mother was cast into prison by the same Amulius and the two boys were cast into the Tiber. Luckily for the boys the water flowed over and they stranded at the place where Rome lies today where a "lupa" came to their rescue and breastfed them. Lupa means a she-wolf in Latin, but it is also known for it's other meaning which I will return to in a couple syllables. Romulus and Remus together with the city of Rome then got their names from this incident: Ruma simply means "breast" in Latin. Faustulus raised them as shepherds. The brothers were educated in Gabii and grew to become courageous and handsome men. They joyed in hunting and were even known to ambush brigands when loaded with plunder and distributed what they took among the other shepherds to gain their favor. The two seemed inseparable. In the end they managed to kill their father/grand uncle Amulius, and helped reinstate his older brother Numitor. Romulus later killed his brother in a dispute over who of them should be honoured as the founder of Rome. So on April 21, 753 B.C. Romulus still with his brother's blood on his hands founded the city of Rome which soon became a refuge for all kinds of criminals and became reknown for it's prostitution and even the lack of marryable women.

Well to return to my point, which is that Rome is the "mother of harlots" of the Book of Revelation, we have to return to the name of Rome and why it was called what it was called and what really happened there on the shore of Tiber in 771 BC. You see "lupa" which means she-wolf also means harlot or prostitute. So if we apply this to the myth the picture becomes clear. The mother of Romulus and Remus gave birth to them out of wedlock, their father was their own uncle and their nanny was a prostitute. The boys got all their fame and wealth from deceit and robbery, assasinations and revolt. Romulus even "stole" his wife, killed his father and his own brother. In English Palatine even means "quasi-royal authority." Mons Palatinus (the Palatine hill) was the name of the hill around which Romulus founded Rome and where Augustus C�sar's house later stood, and even after that again became the site of the splendid residence built by C�sar Nero.

When Jesus served the wine and the bread and told us to do it in rememberance of him, he didn't mean that we should serve wine as blood and unleavened bread as flesh. He simply said that they should celebrate Passover in rememberance of him. The wine of the Passover is the blood that flows in his veins. The unleavened bread is like the flesh on his bones. The lamb on the table a reminder of his sacrifice, it's blood on the door beams as a token of his salvation. But the Romans didn't like Passover. So they turned it into a Venus festival you even call Easter, called up after the Germanic fertility goddess Austron who was celebrated each year at spring equinox. That freakin' easterbunny of yours is the mythological beast that gave birth to Venus in the shape of an egg by the river Euphrates.

Don't come patronise me about your ignorance, not you ignorance, when it's obvious who's ignorant here.

Blessings,
Mikromarius

In all terms a Protestant are all those who aren't Catholic and are Christian. I didn't come out and say "you" are one, I'm just saying your bent on Protestant notions and thought. Don't put words in my mouth. Easter is when we celebrate Christ's Resurrection. I'm sure it wasn't when it happened.

The early Church brought the Faith to the pagans, not the Romans, by putting the major Christian celebrations right close to theirs. It worked with great success, as you can see in religious demographics. A great PR move by the Church to bring Christ to the masses. Jesus did say "make disciples of all nations." and they did with zeal.


About your pagan story, here you go:

Did you read what I said THE VATICAN IS NOT ROME, it isn't even in Rome like I said it was built on a seperate hill not the original seven hills. Rome is Rome and not the Church, many Romans were a part of the Church but they weren't the Church. Two seperate entities buddy.

Alot of Protestants think the Church is "Mother of Harlots" because they think celibacy is doctrine when its not. Priestly celibacy is not a doctrine but a discipline in the Latin Rite of the Church (this discipline wasn't always required in the past), Eastern Rite Catholics can be married and be priests. This discipline can scarcely be unbiblical, because even Paul was celibate and he himself recommended it to others that wanted to devote their lives to Christ.

Protestants again tried to get to a literal interpretation. They should interpret the harlotry of the Whore�s daughters as the same as their mother�s, which is why she is called their mother in the first place. This would make it spiritual or political fornication or the persecution of Christian martyrs (cf. 17:2, 6, 18:6). Instead, the fundies give the interpretation of the daughters as literal, earthly prostitutes committing literal, sex.

If the Protestants got rid of the King James Version of the Bible and go back to the true Bible, they would notice another point that identifies the daughters� harlotries with that of their mother: The same Greek word (porne) is used for both mother and daughters. The King James Version translates this word to "whore" whenever it refers to the word mother, but as "harlot" when it refers to the word daughter. Modern translations render it consistently. John sees the "great harlot" (17:1, 15, 16, 19:2) who is "the mother of harlots" (17:5). The harlotries of the daughters must be the same as the mother�s, which the protestant faction admits is not literal sex! That is the meaning of "Mother of Harlots"

To sum up this, we go to Carl:

"The fact that the Catholic Church is singled out by Fundamentalists as the Whore reveals that they intuit the fact it has an important role in God�s plan. No other church gets accused of being the Whore�only the Catholic Church. And it is understandable why: The Catholic Church is the largest Christian body, larger than all other Christian bodies put together, suggesting a prominent place in God�s plan. Fundamentalists assume, without rationally looking at the evidence, that the Catholic Church cannot be the Bride of Christ, so it must be the Whore of Babylon.

Yet the evidence for its true role is plain. The First Vatican Council taught that "the Church itself . . . because of its marvelous propagation, its exceptional holiness, and inexhaustible fruitfulness in all good works; because of its Catholic unity and invincible stability, is a very great and perpetual motive of credibility and an incontestable witness of its own divine mission".

So why is the Bride maligned as the Whore? Jesus himself answered the question: "If they have called the master of the house Beelzebul, how much more will they malign those of his household" (Matt. 10:25). "If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world . . . the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you, �A servant is not greater than his master.� If they persecuted me, they will persecute you" (John 15:18�20). "

Your quote "When Jesus served the wine and the bread and told us to do it in rememberance of him, he didn't mean that we should serve wine as blood and unleavened bread as flesh."

Well this doesn't fly with me, here are some verses that prove otherwise:

Matt. 19:6 - Jesus says a husband and wife become one flesh which is consummated in the life giving union of the marital act. This union of marital love which reflects Christ's union with the Church is physical, not just spiritual. Thus, when Paul says we are apart of Christ's body (Eph. 1:22-23; 5:23,30-31; Col. 1:18,24), he means that our union with Christ is physical, not just spiritual. But our union with Christ can only be physical if He is actually giving us something physical, that is Himself, which is His body and blood to consume (otherwise it is a mere spiritual union).

Luke 14:15 - blessed is he who eats this bread in the kingdom of God, on earth and in heaven.

Luke 22:19, 1 Cor. 11:24-25 - Jesus commands the apostles to "do this," that is, offer the Eucharistic sacrifice, in remembrance of Him.

Luke 24:26-35 - in the Emmaus road story, Jesus gives a homily on the Scriptures and then follows it with the celebration of the Eucharist. This is the Holy Mass, and the Church has followed this order of the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist for over 2,000 years.

Luke 24:30-31,35 - Jesus is known only in the breaking of bread. Luke is emphasizing that we only receive the fullness of Jesus by celebrating the Eucharistic feast of His body and blood, which is only offered in its fullness by the Catholic Church.

John 1:14 - literally, this verse teaches that the Word was made flesh and "pitched His tabernacle" among us. The Eucharist, which is the Incarnate Word of God under the appearance of bread, is stored in the tabernacles around the world.

John 21:15,17 - Jesus charges Peter to "feed" His sheep, that is, with the Word of God through preaching and the Eucharist.

These are just a few verses that say otherwise. As I said to Helen, and I'll say to you, we should concentrate on our similarities, and not accuse. If we do that the world will be a much better place as people work for the betterment and expansion of Christ's Kingdom and not the opposite.









[Edited on 10-16-2003 by Cearbhall]