my apologies to Wooba

[OntheDL]

I was writing my apology before the thread got closed. But i want to publicly say I'm sorry to wooba and maybe have a chance to explain a little bit.

I snapped. I'm sorry. It wasn't necessary to say to you feel free to leave. This is what happens when two stubborn people disagree. But I should have been better.

Well, if I have all these question marks about what SDAs teach, would I want to be a part of it? So why do I complain? Still, I wasn't doing you a service. I just flipped. I'm sorry.

Like I said to you before, don't take the internet thing too seriously. I'm really a very friendly guy in person but I just have this take no prisoner attitude. So don't take it too seriously. And next time we get into an argument, I'm going to remember this and laugh about it. So let it slide please.

 

[Dathen]

You've done the right thing. It would of taken alot of courage to do this. I'm adding to your reputation. Because after all, we're all sinners.

 

[OntheDL]

You've done the right thing. It would of taken alot of courage to do this. I'm adding to your reputation. Because after all, we're all sinners.

Thanks for understanding. I hope Wooba will accept my apology. You might not know this, we have had afew debates in the past. We were like two mill stones grinding each other. So this was like a compound reaction.

Well, I'm way past my bed time. This is where all the trouble started in the first place.

Good night,

 

[Dathen]

Night in america, yet only 5:26 in Australia, interesting. It's amazing how time does vary.

 

[woobadooba]

I was writing my apology before the thread got closed. But i want to publicly say I'm sorry to wooba and maybe have a chance to explain a little bit.

OK

Well, if I have all these question marks about what SDAs teach, would I want to be a part of it?

It's a virtue to ask questions. One who merely accepts what he's taught without asking questions is one who never really learns how to answer questions.

So why do I complain?

If you go back and look at the thread you will see that I wasn't trying to attack the SDA stance on this idea. I was merely pointing out that the United States fits the description of Babylon in Rev. 18, more so than the concept that Rev. 18:4 is referring to the false church.

I had hoped to discuss the matter in an intelligent manner, but that really didn't happen.

It wasn't until you informed me that I should not reinvent the wheel, but that I should just accept the traditional view without question, that I began to point out the many theological errors that exist, or have existed at one point, within our church.

Truth is, I'm looking for scriptural harmony, not conflict.

By the way, the Roman Empire was the most powerful force in all the world when Peter referred to it as the Babylon of its time. Some even declared Rome to be "all the world" because of this. Hence, it was likened to the Babylon of Nebuchadnezzar's time.

Things have changed since then. Now the United States is the most powerful force in all the world. So it is fitting that it would be referred to as the Babylon of today, since it too, fosters the same concepts and prowess as the Babylon which was before it.

Hence, the same worldly philosophy which governed the Chaldeans, is also the one which ruled over the Romans; and this worldly philosophy is now showing its ugly face in greater strength than ever before in the United States.

With that said, it is important to note that Revelation 18 speaks of the fall of the *city* of Babylon, not the complete elimination of the philosophy which governs it.

So it is safe to say in my opinion, that the United States is the city of Babylon which is described in Rev. 18. Therefore, before the philosophy itself is eliminated, it appears that the United States is going to suffer a mighty blow from God. At that point, the city of Babylon will fall. But the philosophy (root of the problem) will not be effaced from existence until a later time.

In other words, I don't believe that all the world will receive the same plagues that the United States will receive as spoken of in Rev. 18:4.

For, if this were the case, then the merchants referred to therein wouldn't be mourning over the loss of the city of Babylon, but would be mourning over the loss and devastation of their own cities (countries). For, it appears that though they have suffered a loss as a result of what had happened to Babylon, they seem to be in a better position. Of course, only God knows how long that will last.

 

[tall73]

alright, a couple of thoughts, and I hope this doesn't re-start the argument, but might re-start the discussion.


a. it is a city. If we are to interpret it as something other than a city we need to explain why. Now having said that Babylon was the capitol of an empire, as was Rome.

b. The question comes down to whether you take an end time futurism approach or an historicist approach. If you take an historicist approach then the power of Rome certainly was a merchant power. If you look at a futurism approach then the US fits better.

C. Slaves were one of the commodities. Yes it was in their terms. But Rome had an extremely high population of slaves, especially in the capitol city.

D. It is an interesting point that onthedl makes regarding the vision of Daniel 2. The power of Rome is seen as still operating at the end time.

E. We already have both powers talked about in chapter 13 in the traditional view.

F. There the prostitute AND her daughters. It is not a question of just one entity in the bigger picture.

G. Here is the biggest point to me. The theme of a harlot in Scripture is well developed in the OT. God's people were often called a harlot when unfaithful, due to spiritual adultery.

We see a faithful woman in chapt. 12 representing God's people. And now we see a prostitute in chapter 18. The contrast seems to be of a faithful and unfaithful group that was once following God.

This also fits with the remnant theme seen more than once in the book. The remnant are the children of the woman in chapter 12. The harlot also has her children in chapter 18.

The faithful remnant always existed in times of apostacy when the rest of the people had become unfaithful.

So I would lean toward it being a religious entity of some type.

 

[woobadooba]

So I would lean toward it being a religious entity of some type.

I'm not denying that there's a religious/philosophical aspect to it. What I'm saying is that the nature of this prophecy makes it very clear that this is more than a religious entity. It's an actual world-power which is governed by a philosophy of lawlessness/moral relativism.

It is evident to me that the only world-power that fits this description is the United States. Right now this country of ours is promoting the views of moral relativism in a way like never before, while claiming to be founded on Christian tenets. Hence, it is Babylon (confusion).

Furthermore, the harlot that is spoken of in Revelation represents a philosophy of lawlessness operating under the guise of a religio-political power. And she will not be taken out of the way until that great day when God effaces sin in its totality, from existence. Yet, according to Rev. 18, the city of Babylon will suffer plagues before this happens.

These plagues are very real. Therefore, if what is spoken of in Rev. 18 is merely a religious entity/concept, how could it suffer real plagues?