I really hate the book of Revelation

[wordsoflife]

I wasn't agreeing with someone being called 'heretic'. I think the term is vague and often misused.

Gnosticism is a heresy. I have no problem calling it what it is.

 

[dollarsbill]

Gnosticism is a heresy. I have no problem calling it what it is.

Define 'heresy'.

 

[wordsoflife]

Define 'heresy'.

You have google don't you. Go to Webster online and read the definition.

 

[dollarsbill]

You have google don't you. Go to Webster online and read the definition.

I did. It basically seems like 'Unorthodox' to me. Is that what you are saying? Unorthodox is 'heresy'? If so, I wouldn't dispute that it is.

 

[wordsoflife]

I did. It basically seems like 'Unorthodox' to me. Is that what you are saying? Unorthodox is 'heresy'? If so, I wouldn't dispute that it is.

Definition of HERESY

1
a : adherence to a religious opinion contrary to church dogma
b : denial of a revealed truth by a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church
c : an opinion or doctrine contrary to church dogma
2
a : dissent or deviation from a dominant theory, opinion, or practice
b : an opinion, doctrine, or practice contrary to the truth or to generally accepted beliefs or standards

 

[dollarsbill]

Definition of HERESY

1
a : adherence to a religious opinion contrary to church dogma
b : denial of a revealed truth by a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church
c : an opinion or doctrine contrary to church dogma
2
a : dissent or deviation from a dominant theory, opinion, or practice
b : an opinion, doctrine, or practice contrary to the truth or to generally accepted beliefs or standards

I just told you I read it. But that didn't answer my question.

 

[wordsoflife]

I just told you I read it. But that didn't answer my question.

If you read the definition it states what heresy is and the answer is obvious.

 

[dollarsbill]

If you read the definition it states what heresy is and the answer is obvious.

You agree with 'unorthodox' being 'heresy'? I don't really see where the Bible uses the word 'heretic'.

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish]

As to your supposition of the 10 horns and little horn as Antiochus IV, it also dosen't fit. In order to recognise the "power" as regards the beast in Revelation 13 and Daniel 7 there are certain pre-requisites laid out which must be present for this identification: 1.) The time of appearance (comes up among the 10 horns) 2.) different from the other horns, 3.) will do away with three horns, 4.) speak pompous words against the most high, 5.) persecute the Saints, 6.) think to change times and Laws, 7.) Rule for 1260 years (time, times, and 1/2 time) So I dont' think that ruler fits the bill, and its also why the Papal Rome comes under fire cause it does fit all 7 criterion.

When Roman emperor Justinian's general Bellsarius kills the Bishop Viquilius for being too independent and Rome afterwards again goes on a campaign, the emperor gave his septre over to bishop Silverius to rule in his absence, thus creating "PAPAL" Rome.(answers time of little horns appearance and different from the others=Politican and Religious Powers)which continues to rule for 1260 years until 1798 A.D. when Napolean sent his general Berthier to Rome and captured it and the Pope, who died in prison.(thinks to change times and Laws(changes the Commandments), persecutes the saints=the dark ages, speaks pompus words against the most High=Pope is God on earth, rules for 1260 years)
After the Pope died (the beast received a mortal wound) which remained 'unhealed' until 1929 when Mussolini instills Pope Gaspari once again as having Pope for church.(mortal wound healed) The ten horns at the time of the little horns rising were representing peoples, powers, or nations which occupied the Roman empire in 476 A.D.; 1.) Alamanni (Germany) 2.) Franks (France) 3.) Saxon (English) 4.) Visigoths (Spanish) 5.) Burgundians (Swiss) 6.) Lombards (Italians) 7.) Suevi (Portuguese) 8.) Herlihi 9.) Vandals 10.) Ostergoths. The Herlihi, Vandals, and Ostergoths were persecuted and wiped out, hence uprooted three horns.

God Bless;
doc8645

As to your supposition of the 10 horns and little horn as Antiochus IV, it also dosen't fit. In order to recognise the "power" as regards the beast in Revelation 13 and Daniel 7 there are certain pre-requisites laid out which must be present for this identification: 1.) The time of appearance (comes up among the 10 horns) 2.) different from the other horns, 3.) will do away with three horns, 4.) speak pompous words against the most high, 5.) persecute the Saints, 6.) think to change times and Laws, 7.) Rule for 1260 years (time, times, and 1/2 time) So I dont' think that ruler fits the bill, and its also why the Papal Rome comes under fire cause it does fit all 7 criterion.

This is combining Daniel and Revelation, and that assumes that those two books are canonical, and I believe that they are both apocryphal and don’t mesh together properly, if they were the truth. There were 10 horns on Daniel’s fourth beast. The 11 th horn usurps three horns, which happened historically. The little horn doesn’t have to come up among the other horns, all at the same time.
Antiochus did speak pompous words; he was also trying to do away with all the laws of the Jews. Antiochus did persecute the saints, Jewish at that time. The 1260 years come from Revelation. And it’s actually 1260 days or three and half years, a repeated numerical symbol in Revelation. I think it might have been that the writer or writers of Revelation believed in a final 7 year tribulation, maybe got from Daniel (not sure). And then they might have divided the 7 years in half, symbolically signifying something.

When Roman emperor Justinian's general Bellsarius kills the Bishop Viquilius for being too independent and Rome afterwards again goes on a campaign, the emperor gave his septre over to bishop Silverius to rule in his absence, thus creating "PAPAL" Rome.(answers time of little horns appearance and different from the others=Politican and Religious Powers)which continues to rule for 1260 years until 1798 A.D. when Napolean sent his general Berthier to Rome and captured it and the Pope, who died in prison.(thinks to change times and Laws(changes the Commandments), persecutes the saints=the dark ages, speaks pompus words against the most High=Pope is God on earth, rules for 1260 years)

This is the historicist approach, which I used to believe to be true, for a while.

After the Pope died (the beast received a mortal wound) which remained 'unhealed' until 1929 when Mussolini instills Pope Gaspari once again as having Pope for church.(mortal wound healed) The ten horns at the time of the little horns rising were representing peoples, powers, or nations which occupied the Roman empire in 476 A.D.; 1.) Alamanni (Germany) 2.) Franks (France) 3.) Saxon (English) 4.) Visigoths (Spanish) 5.) Burgundians (Swiss) 6.) Lombards (Italians) 7.) Suevi (Portuguese) 8.) Herlihi 9.) Vandals 10.) Ostergoths. The Herlihi, Vandals, and Ostergoths were persecuted and wiped out, hence uprooted three horns.

It doesn’t work out as ten horns, because there is North Africa, and the Byzantine Empire to consider. The Sassanid’s took over Mesopotamia as well. What about Dacia?
I don’t think you can combine Daniel and Revelation and make it work out. The fourth beast of Daniel is said to be a fierce beast with ten horns, which tramples over the previous beast-empires. But Rome didn’t conquer Parthia or Media, (Mesopotamia, yes).
The fourth beast of Daniel is not said to be a dragon, it is unspecified what it is. I still think it represented Greek Empire; the Seleucid and Ptolemaic empires.
Revelation creates a seven headed hydra, which is derived from Greek legend. The hydra’s heads would pop up again after being cut off.
The beast with the mortal head wound was Nero, and that is part of the Nero ‘revividus’ (revival) myth, where they believed that Nero would return, perhaps from exile in Parthia.
This revived Nero would be the final beast before the return of Christ and the destruction of Rome. The beast Nero was one of the heads of the hydra-dragon. The head would pop out again.

The seven heads represented seven Roman Emperors, and also the Seven Hills of Rome. The hydra represented Rome in general.
Who the emperors were is anyone’s guess, and the book doesn’t justify trying to work out where to start and finish in the emperor list, as they wanted to be so obscure and cryptic that it is meaningless to us now.
The angel is supposed to clarify what it all means, and yet it is just another level of riddles; the one ‘who was, is not, and will be’, was probably a reference to the devil, as being incarnated in the seventh emperor, so he is the ‘eighth and of the seven’, so all seven Roman emperors were ‘of the devil’.

If Revelation was consistent with Daniel, then the beast would be Daniel’s fourth beast, as that was supposed to be Rome, at least misidentified by the early Christians who composed Revelation. But Daniel’s fourth beast wasn’t a seven headed hydra, or it would have said so.
Revelation’s beast is a new creation, so that seven heads could represent Rome, and also have that obsessive numerology thing going on with the number seven.
The writer of Revelation took the ten horns on Daniel’s fourth beast, and stuck them on the seven headed hydra. But how do you put ten horns on seven heads? And then Revelation has these ten horns representing a decemvirate of rulers, who ruled at the same time as the beast ruler. These ten rulers turn on the woman (Roman religion or the Roman Church) and destroy it, (burn with fire and eat her flesh and all that).

The ten horns on the fourth beast of Daniel actually work out, in history. Antiochus works out as the 11 th horn. He might have been stout (I’d need to do more research).
I don’t accept the historicist view of Revelation. I don’t think the little horn is the papacy. It might have been credible back during the reformation, but now Christianity has spread all over the world, and the papacy is no longer central to everything.
Revelation is so full of numerical symbolism, that I don’t know how anyone could believe it to be the truth about the future. Just read some of it; a third of this, a third of that, and much hail and plague and everything else that they could throw in to make it sound dramatic and impressive to those readers back in Asia Minor 2000 years ago.

Anyway, it’s already been established that horns represent kings, it stated that somewhere in Daniel or Rev. I can’t remember where now without going over it all again and looking it up.
I read another book over Christmas on the bible. I read books by sceptics, as you get another angle on the bible. The author said about Revelation, that it is so full of numerology, astrology and cabalism, that it belongs on the bookshelf of an occult bookshop. I’m not sure where the astrology is.

Daniel was said to have probably been written by many authors over many centuries. I think that there was originally a core story to Daniel. Ezekiel mentions someone called Dan’el, someone very wise. But I read somewhere that this Dan’el might have been from another non- Israelite tribe, a tribe which also had El as their God.
So there probably was a legendary figure before the Babylonian exile called Dan’el or Daniel. (As Ezekiel was exiled in Babylon). The story of Daniel might have been written after the exile, drawing on the Israelite hero Daniel. Later an apocalypse was added, having Daniel dreaming and interpreting dreams. Then later again, was added all the retrospective history about the Greeks, in the later chapters. The final draft was written during the time of Antiochus. It seems to me that Daniel's story is much too similar to the story of Joseph in Egypt. Both interpret dreams, both rise up to high rank in that society.

I knew a very long time ago, that Moses probably knew about the law code of Hammurabi. What I didn’t know was that the ‘eye for eye and tooth for tooth’ was lifted almost word for word from Hammurabi.

Although some here think that Yahweh of the OT is not the same God as the God of Jesus, I still think that Yahweh is the same. It is just that the bible was written by people. There is enough for me to make me think that the Israelites were used as a vehicle for the transmission of the revelation of God. Although Moses might have derived his religious ideas of Yahweh from the Midianites.
For me, Daniel and Revelation are apocryphal books, which should not have been included in my bible. Christians have worked out a very elaborate eschatology from these two books. But all that conflicts with what Jesus said about his return. Jesus said that it would be like the days before the great flood. That people would be carrying on as normal, and that the Second Advent would be a total surprise. That does not fit with a great tribulation, an antichrist and the mark of the beast, and specific time periods of 3 1/2 years x 2. I think they have got it wrong. I hope to discover where they got the idea of an antichrist from. At the moment I don’t know.

The number 666 is a code for Nero. Sometimes it was written as 616, which is due to the code being for the Latin or Greek version of the name Nero Caesar.

 

[timbo3]

Nope. Jerusalum was in the hands of the Jebusites until David conquered it. Then and only then did it not only become an Israeli city, but also the capitol.

Nothing was said about Jerusalem being an Israelite city but that Israelites lived there, for Joshua 15:63 says: "As for the Jebusites who were dwelling in Jerusalem, the sons of Judah were not able to drive them away; and the Jebusites continue dwelling with the sons of Judah in Jerusalem down to this day."

Later, at Judges 1:8, it says: "Furthermore, the sons of Judah carried on war against Jerusalem and got to capture it, and they went striking it with the edge of the sword., and the city they consigned to the fire." Thus, Jerusalem was inhabited by the Israelites long before David gained complete control of the city in about 1069 B.C.E.

 

[Soulgazer]

Nothing was said about Jerusalem being an Israelite city but that Israelites lived there, for Joshua 15:63 says: "As for the Jebusites who were dwelling in Jerusalem, the sons of Judah were not able to drive them away; and the Jebusites continue dwelling with the sons of Judah in Jerusalem down to this day."

Later, at Judges 1:8, it says: "Furthermore, the sons of Judah carried on war against Jerusalem and got to capture it, and they went striking it with the edge of the sword., and the city they consigned to the fire." Thus, Jerusalem was inhabited by the Israelites long before David gained complete control of the city in about 1069 B.C.E.

It's not my opinion. ]It's an acknowledged anachronism; I could see an (unlikely) alternative though--- Heads were often displayed as warnings to potential enemies. Perhaps, then, David had it in his mind to conquer the Jebusite stronghold already as a youth, and he took Goliath’s head to serve notice to Jerusalem that they were next.

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish]

It's not my opinion. ]It's an acknowledged anachronism; I could see an (unlikely) alternative though--- Heads were often displayed as warnings to potential enemies. Perhaps, then, David had it in his mind to conquer the Jebusite stronghold already as a youth, and he took Goliath’s head to serve notice to Jerusalem that they were next.

I read a book over Christmas, and it said that it wasn't David who killed Goliath, it was someone else (don't remember the name) and that was added later.

 

[dollarsbill]

I read a book over Christmas, and it said that it wasn't David who killed Goliath, it was someone else (don't remember the name) and that was added later.

Maybe you should have been reading the Bible?

 

[Soulgazer]

I read a book over Christmas, and it said that it wasn't David who killed Goliath, it was someone else (don't remember the name) and that was added later.

I hadn't heard any historical differences of opinion. However, I would think that David had to kill Goliath in the legend, to keep the mytho-moral intact. It's such a well established myth that I would hate to see it compromised. Sometimes I hate finding out new things!

 

[Noxot]

Gnosticism is a heresy. I have no problem calling it what it is.

well that is funny because most blind hypocrites are unwilling to stop loving murderers, yeah they call them doctors of the church. "saint" ( more like devil ) thomas aquinas is one such revered man. he said it is a good thing to TORTURE heretics. and yet who is the heretic against Jesus Christ? the wicked murderer who thinks it is good to cause grievous damage to people that do not believe what he believes.

heresy is just another word that corrupt human beings use to control one another. people just refuse to stop worshiping illusions of truth it seems. I kind of wonder how many people in this world really have a heart for God and a mind for God, it seems like most people are happy following tradition and not willing to use their brain and heart. what apathy they have!

we should all come to a point were we see God as the God of noxot, the God of wordsoflife, ect. rather than the God of this man or that man. it seems like people deny the power of God though, no faith at all. God is just some figure far away, not able to be close to at all, no such thing as a relationship with him. whatever happened to that? I think I would rather go insane than to end up like everyone else, I would rather tempt God than to have more of the same that everyone else has. it would truly be better for God to crush me with his finger than to have to live here on the earth with some God that is far away. I would rather be real than to pretend that all there is, is to abide by moral values and laws that make no sense at all.

 

[SavedFromChrist91]

The Book of Revelation is one of the greatest parts of the Bible, and Jesus made the book written in the way it is so that people who didn't BELIEVE would not understand it, some would think they understand it, but don't. True people of Christ can't question it because it's all the truth. If you deny it, you have a false understanding of it, didn't Jesus say those who didn't believe who not understand.

 

[Noxot]

Luther did have a problem with Revelation. He also called James "an epistle of straw". The Apocrypha was included in the original King James bible. It wasn't until 1895 that it was removed.

I thought luther was the guy that had to do a lot of repenting in the end due to some of the things he believed? who in their right mind would think james of all people was a epistle of straw?? rofl. and then again i notice straw is food for some animals so he was not really lying.

The Book of Revelation is one of the greatest parts of the Bible, and Jesus made the book written in the way it is so that people who didn't BELIEVE would not understand it, some would think they understand it, but don't. True people of Christ can't question it because it's all the truth. If you deny it, you have a false understanding of it, didn't Jesus say those who didn't believe who not understand.

that is how it is for all of the scriptures, I am happy revelation seems so far out and crazy because some of the other scriptures are so hard to comprehend what they are saying that one could easily assume that it literal rather than deep spiritual teachings. revelation is hard to understand as well but visions tend to draw many things together into a unity of truth and explanations. the saying that goes "a picture is worth a thousand words" is rather quite true and the entire bible is one huge picture, it is the solid rock that is constantly gushing out more and more water.http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/shepherd.html also has a giant vision in it and i have found it to be quite amazing and yet most people are going to accept things based on what their traditions say rather than looking for God, who is the only one the followers of Christ should be constantly going after. i am convinced that if we do not forsake every thing except trying to learn of God and to be with God, that it will be us who are to blame for lacking the things that are abundantly provided by the Father.

the chaos of all the different belief systems we all have really show just how hard we who seek the truth ought to strive very much with God. we should all be pushing each other hard to come to a knowledge of the truth. we should have faith in God, that what he does for the apostles, he would do for us. we ought to stop having doubt that God would not give each one of us dreams and visions of divine revelation, because we should not bow down to traditions of men if it means following after a God who has no power to strike us down with truth. we all know God has the power of all wisdom and knowledge, I hope we are all destroyed by it. i hope we will all be slain by the breath of his mouth sooner rather than later. after all, no one is good, no not one. therefore in dying we shall know the truth and be set free.

 

[mike stewart]

The Book of Revelation is one of the greatest parts of the Bible, and Jesus made the book written in the way it is so that people who didn't BELIEVE would not understand it, some would think they understand it, but don't. True people of Christ can't question it because it's all the truth. If you deny it, you have a false understanding of it, didn't Jesus say those who didn't believe who not understand.

Chapter 1 verse 20 'Here is the secret meaning in the seven stars(churches)......' . By telling us there is 'secret meaning' Jesus is asking us to seek out what it is or why else would he call it a secret or mention it at all. It is a geometric secret based on the position of these churches in a design of ancient landscape geometry. You don't have to just believe that to be true, it is a fact, so you can verify it if you wish when all the data is available very soon.
Jesus and Mary of Magdala must have known about this design of landscape geometry of sacred sites in the Holy Land and elsewhere which was clearly set out long before their time and they must have also known that at some time it would be found. Well it has now been found just as Jesus must have predicted it would be and logically revealing this design must be a time of Revelation.

How Jesus knew about this design is a mystery but not an unfathomable one to a true believer...

 

[SavedFromChrist91]

Chapter 1 verse 20 'Here is the secret meaning in the seven stars(churches)......' . By telling us there is 'secret meaning' Jesus is asking us to seek out what it is or why else would he call it a secret or mention it at all. It is a geometric secret based on the position of these churches in a design of ancient landscape geometry. You don't have to just believe that to be true, it is a fact, so you can verify it if you wish when all the data is available very soon.
Jesus and Mary of Magdala must have known about this design of landscape geometry of sacred sites in the Holy Land and elsewhere which was clearly set out long before their time and they must have also known that at some time it would be found. Well it has now been found just as Jesus must have predicted it would be and logically revealing this design must be a time of Revelation.

How Jesus knew about this design is a mystery but not an unfathomable one to a true believer...

Yet a lot of people who don't realize how much fact and truth is in this book will discredit it and say this all is fake and not true. When so much has happened. I am seeking the truth just as every other Christian should as we await Christ's return to rule.

 

[Ripheus27]

If the Son doesn't know the day or the hour, how less likely is it that anyone else is going to know the week or month or year? For if the Son was God Incarnate and still fully man, then there is no way for a man to know when the end will come. Isn't this why there is a comparison between the end and a thief coming in the night? Isn't the entire enterprise of trying to match one or another historical event to prophecy not just futile but sinful?

An exception can be made for Christ's (apparent) prediction of Jerusalem's destruction. But this, I think, follows from the unique horror of that destruction. If we use modern scholars' estimates as the low end of the range, and the figure from Josephus as the higher end, then the 600,000 from Tacitus is the "centrist" estimate. Even so, this is twice the Rape of Nanking (300,000 probably murdered) and only the dubious statistics from the times of Mongolian horde atrocities indicate that khans had a million or more people massacred in one or another city, so by quite a few indications, the Roman Empire was responsible for the ultimate citywide mass murder in history. (Even if we allow that Genghis Khan oversaw numerically greater slaughter in at least one urban environment, consider how much less the overall population of the Earth was in Rome's time versus Genghis Khan's.) Christ, as divine and therefore morally perfect, would be "in tune" with the moral sequence of history, and His anticipation of the abomination of desolation might very well reflect that fact.