The Lake of Fire

[Fireinfolding]

Babylon is the LOF. The OC LAW OF DEATH AND HADES.


Reve 19:3 and a second time They have declared Hallelujah and the Smoke of Heris ascending into the Ages of the Ages

touV <3588> aiwnaV <165> twn <3588> aiwnwn <165>

Reve 14:11 And the Smoke of the Tormenting of Them into Ages of Ages is ascending. And not they are having rest of Day and of Night the Ones worshipping the Wild Beast, and the image of it, and if anyone is getting the image ofthe Name of it.

eiV <1519> {INTO} aiwnaV <165> aiwnwn <165>

Which say, Stand by thyself, come not near to me; for I am holier than thou. These are a smoke in my nose, a fire that burneth all the day.

Rev 8:15 The merchants of these things, which were made rich by her, shall stand afar off for the fear of her torment, weeping and wailing,

 

[Glass*Soul]

Wow. You guys use really big font.

 

[Fireinfolding]

Wow. You guys use really big font.

I find its easier to read that way

Second thought... I dont think if anything was written on the face of the sky it would matter


I was just busting with him

P.S Happy birthday ~Glass* Soul~

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Wow. You guys use really big font.

I think I inherited Paul's eyesight!

Gala 6:11 Ye see in how large letters I have written to you with my own hand; 12 as many as are willing to make a good appearance in the flesh, these constrain you to be circumcised--only that for the cross of the Christ they may not be persecuted,

 

[Fireinfolding]

I think I inherited Paul's eyesight!

Gala 6:11 Ye see in how large letters I have written to you with my own hand; 12 as many as are willing to make a good appearance in the flesh, these constrain you to be circumcised--only that for the cross of the Christ they may not be persecuted,

 

[Zadok7000]

Loosen up. It's aplocolyptic literature. It's supposed to make you think, and not always in a logical, linear fashion. It uses the rich, receptive language of symbols for the very purpose of inviting you to immerse yourself in it. Almost as if it is a dream rising out of your own subconscious and catching you up in the action.

I always enjoy Biblical instruction and correction from non-Christians. LOL!

Well, I was attempting to take into consideration GCT's reference to a broken imago Dei in mankind and musing over what might happen if such a splinter were to encounter the fullness of the Deity in the Christ. Why that would be a piece of New Age rhetoric, I'm unsure.

Your talk of "Divine Spliter" and "spark" and "diety of the Christ" are all New Age/Buddhist talking points as I'm sure you know.

I am not sure what going any further would accomplish, considering your beliefs:

"I'm a non-theistic follower of Jesus Christ. I ceased to believe in God about three years ago due to an extreme skepticism towards all claims regarding the existence or nature of God."

Would you like to tender a suggestion as to what might happen?

That I haven't already said? Could you be more specific?

 

[angelmom01]

Of course.

OK

He Returns as the Lion of Judah as King of Kings - ALL will bow when He does.

It says that every knee will bow and every tongue will confess, absolutely. It also say that He come THE SECOND TIME UNTO THOSE WHO LOOK FOR HIM. Are ALL looking for Him?

NO.

I disagree. He lives IN those who are born again. You are looking for a PHYSICAL manifestation and that is not what the scriptures say, IMHO, about his "second coming".

Full Preterist, angelmom?

Nope!

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

Your talk of "Divine Spliter" and "spark" and "diety of the Christ" are all New Age/Buddhist talking points as I'm sure you know.

How is "diety of the Christ" a New Age/Buddhist talking point? Here I thought it was standard Christian orthodoxy to think of the Christ/the Messiah as divine...

(And when did Buddhism become New Age....?)

Oh, and might I point out that not only do I agree with you about "spark" and "splinter" language (being that its gnostic at the root), but such was never brought up in my post itself.

 

[Glass*Soul]

How is "diety of the Christ" a New Age/Buddhist talking point? Here I thought it was standard Christian orthodoxy to think of the Christ/the Messiah as divine...

(And when did Buddhism become New Age....?)

Oh, and might I point out that not only do I agree with you about "spark" and "splinter" language (being that its gnostic at the root), but such was never brought up in my post itself.

That's true. You used the term "broken" and I free-associated the word "splinter" as in a splinter of glass. As I was actually picturing a broken mirror in my mind's eye, I could have just as easily chosen the term "shard". I was aware that the term "spark" is associated with Gnosticism, but I wasn't aware that "splinter" also had that connotation.

Theological questions remind me of string theory in that if you're picturing it in your mind, you're not getting it. So any word I chose was probably going to be problematic.

As for my phrasing regarding the "fullness of the Deity in the Christ," I was practically quoting from Colossians on that one.

I apologize if I appeared to be misrepresenting your statement.

 

[Glass*Soul]

I always enjoy Biblical instruction and correction from non-Christians. LOL!



Your talk of "Divine Spliter" and "spark" and "diety of the Christ" are all New Age/Buddhist talking points as I'm sure you know.

I am not sure what going any further would accomplish, considering your beliefs:

"I'm a non-theistic follower of Jesus Christ. I ceased to believe in God about three years ago due to an extreme skepticism towards all claims regarding the existence or nature of God."




That I haven't already said? Could you be more specific?

I don't see the things I'm saying in this topic, particularly my advice regarding apocalyptic literature, as being characteritic of atheism. My background is Christian and my intent is to post in a manner that is respectful of Christianity when I post in any formerly Christain Only forums. I hope that people can respond primarily to my posts and not my profile. If my ideas strike anyone as unorthodox or unscriptural, tell me why. Discuss it with me. That's all I ask.

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

That's true. You used the term "broken" and I free-associated the word "splinter" as in a splinter of glass. As I was actually picturing a broken mirror in my mind's eye, I could have just as easily chosen the term "shard". I was aware that the term "spark" is associated with Gnosticism, but I wasn't aware that "splinter" also had that connotation.

Theological questions remind me of string theory in that if you're picturing it in your mind, you're not getting it. So any word I chose was probably going to be problematic.

As for my phrasing regarding the "fullness of the Deity in the Christ," I was practically quoting from Colossians on that one.

I apologize if I appeared to be misrepresenting your statement.

No problem. I didn't think you were purposefully mischaracterizing or failed to understand my meaning; I just clarified because on the other hand, I did see where zadok's confusion lay.

 

[Zadok7000]

How is "diety of the Christ" a New Age/Buddhist talking point? Here I thought it was standard Christian orthodoxy to think of the Christ/the Messiah as divine...

(And when did Buddhism become New Age....?)

Of couse I believe 100% that Yeshua Messiah is God, but the teaching of "the Christ" when coupled with things like denying the Biblical God are 100% a Buddhist and New Age teaching. That we are divine, a "spark" or "splinter" from the "all" - "the Christ principle" is one "ascending" to a "higher form of consciousness" - has nothing at all to do with our Lord.

Oh, and might I point out that not only do I agree with you about "spark" and "splinter" language (being that its gnostic at the root), but such was never brought up in my post itself.

That was why I was suspicious, especially from a non-Christian.

 

[Zadok7000]

Theological questions remind me of string theory in that if you're picturing it in your mind, you're not getting it. So any word I chose was probably going to be problematic.

I am very familiar with String Theory, and am fascinated by it, but as Christians the "theological question" of God is already settled.

As for my phrasing regarding the "fullness of the Deity in the Christ," I was practically quoting from Colossians on that one.

Ironic you would "practically quote" Col. 2:

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

 

[Glass*Soul]

I'm at a loss as to where to go with this topic at this point.

It was my intent to discuss a very interesting idea about the Lake of Fire that I encountered in General Apologetics within an orthodox, Nicene framework.

Despite the fact that I may have used a couple of phrases that might strike others as being Gnostic, Buddhist or New Age buzzwords, none of these philosophies appeal to me in the same way that orthodox Christianity does.

This was not meant to be a topic about me or my worldview. If everything I say is going to be funneled into a reference to my skepticism, I don't know how to proceed. What I want to discuss is the nature of God as the Christians in this forum understand it. Not in the context of Apologetics. I'm sick to death of Apologetics. I want to discuss it in the framwork of Nicene theology.

That's the only thing that makes sense to me to do at this juncture.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I'm at a loss as to where to go with this topic at this point.

Hi GS. What is your view of the "her" in Reve 19:3 before we go on? Symbolic or Literal?

Hebrews 7:12 for the Priesthood being changed, of necessity also, of Law a change doth come,

Reve 19:3 and a second time They have declared Hallelujah and the Smoke of Her is ascending into the Ages of the Ages

touV <3588> aiwnaV <165> twn <3588> aiwnwn <165>

 

[Glass*Soul]

Hi GS. What is your view of the "her" in Reve 19:3 before we go on? Symbolic or Literal?

Hebrews 7:12 for the Priesthood being changed, of necessity also, of Law a change doth come,

Reve 19:3 and a second time They have declared Hallelujah and the Smoke of Her is ascending into the Ages of the Ages

touV <3588> aiwnaV <165> twn <3588> aiwnwn <165>

I think she is probably Babylon, as the entire previous chapter is speaking of that city. You might find it interesting to look at Rev 18:21.

"Then a mighty angel picked up a boulder the size of a large millstone and threw it into the sea, and said:

With such violence
the great city of Babylon will be thown down,
never to be found again."

The sense of it is that Babylon (like the boulder) is going to be thrown into a body that will receive and close over her (like the sea), but because she will subsequently be emitting large amounts of smoke, I might tender that it is not a sea of water but a sea of fire, perhaps the Lake of Fire.

If you go on reading you find that the fate of Babylon (the Great Prositute) is being contrasted with that of the Bride of the Lamb which turns out in Rev 21:2 to be the New Jerusalem.

I don't think it has anything to do with the priesthood at all. I suspect that Babylon is symbolic of any huge, horrible, souless system that wants to eat people up. That sees them as pawns to be manipulated for the sake of a corrupt marketplace. That sees human beings as both consumers and as resources to be consumed.

The New Jerusalem, on the other hand, produces healing at her center. She actually serves the human beings who enter her.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I don't think it has anything to do with the priesthood at all. I suspect that Babylon is symbolic of any huge, horrible, souless system that wants to eat people up. That sees them as pawns to be manipulated for the sake of a corrupt marketplace. That sees human beings as both consumers and as resources to be consumed.

Ok thanks. I am taking this in stages concerning the use of "ages of the ages".
Actually I can use the whole book of Isaiah for revelation

as for example who is the "We" in Isaiah 28:15:

Isaiah 28:15Because ye-say: `We-cut/karath a-Covenant/b@riyth with Death, And-with Sh@'owl we-made a seer/02374 chozeh, a-scourge overflowing that passeth-over, not he-shall-enter-in-to-us. That we set a-lie/kazab as a-refuge-of-us/machaceh, and in-falsehood/sheqer we-are-concealed/cathar.'

Reve 6:8 And I saw and behold! a horse, green, and the one sitting up on of it, name to Him, the Death, and the Hades followed with him and was given to them authority on the fourth of the land to-from-kill in sword/saber and in famine and in death and under/by the wild beast of the land.

Reve 9:11 They are having upon of them, King--the Messenger of the Abyss--a name to Him, to Hebrew, Abaddon,[Destroyer][Exodus 12:23 Egypt] and in the Greek name he is having Apollyon [Destroyer/from whole looser].

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Anymore thoughts on the "LOF"?

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

Hey, Glass*Soul, you got a character. Cool.

 

[Glass*Soul]

Of couse I believe 100% that Yeshua Messiah is God, but the teaching of "the Christ" when coupled with things like denying the Biblical God are 100% a Buddhist and New Age teaching. That we are divine, a "spark" or "splinter" from the "all" - "the Christ principle" is one "ascending" to a "higher form of consciousness" - has nothing at all to do with our Lord.

That was why I was suspicious, especially from a non-Christian.

I'm not sure what you're suspicious of exactly. Maybe that's not important. I would be interested in how you would distinguish the significance of the term "image" and the word I used, "splinter", now that you know I was mentally picturing a broken mirror as I chose that term.

I'm pretty sure I didn't say anything about ascending to a higher form of consciousness.

Hey, Glass*Soul, you got a character. Cool.

Lol. I just realized we have the same hair.

Would you care to address the significance of the two different terms, "image" and "splinter"?