It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

revalation?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 02:21 PM
link   
being that the bible has been changed over and over again how can we be sure that revalations hasnt been changed so the eventual plan of the illuminatti can be seen (but unseen)?




posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 02:48 PM
link   
it depends.. i don't believe in the change of the bible to suit the illumnati's plans for world domination. that's just speculation. could it be, that the war on Terror, is the catalyst for fundamentalist christians, to preach to the world that the endtimes has begun? Note, none of them TV evangelists future predictions on prophecies in the middle east has come to pass.



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 03:04 PM
link   
How about learning to spell first?



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 03:12 PM
link   
The """illuminati" ( or whatever) havent changed the bible at all. This is just fate,, god showed us exactly (in revelations) how the course of this world will be played out.



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 03:21 PM
link   
For years people have tried to decode Revelations, Im guilty as charged here
and have had several different conclusions.

I guess the only way to truely find out is to read the bible from start to finish.
Something im going to try, just debating on how im going to start.

[edit on 17-7-2005 by evanfitz]



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 03:23 PM
link   
im sure its minorly been changed and who knows maybe their,s a few books missing in it too


[edit on 17-7-2005 by elliott reid]



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by vincere7
How about learning to spell first?
Not very nice.
Practice being nicer and do us all a favor. Thankl you.



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 03:35 PM
link   
""""im sure its minorly been changed and who knows maybe their,s a few books missing in it too""""" Yes i think that a few books have been removed also by groups of people. no names though (catholics) oops.... The book of Enoch is cool to read.



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by evanfitz
Something im going to try, just debating on how im going to start.
[edit on 17-7-2005 by evanfitz]


If you're going to focus on prophetic works I suggest reading the Book of, Daniel
then go to, Zechariah, then to the book of Acts, then to Revelation

From Revelation you will want to go back and forth from Matthew 24 and likewise, Daniel 9.



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 03:46 PM
link   
The new testament is a cut and paste job anyway and the inconsistencies in the bible are so big you cannot ignore them, when i researched this i wanted Jesus to be true so much but now i know his story is from pagan Gods especially Osisris-Dionysis.



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 04:10 PM
link   
Thanx Vincere
. Ill try and start tonight



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by evanfitz
I guess the only way to truely find out is to read the bible from start to finish.
Something im going to try, just debating on how im going to start.

[edit on 17-7-2005 by evanfitz]



I hadn't read the Bible all the way through until about 13 years ago. I heartily encourage you to do so. Books like Numbers, Deuteronomy and Leviticus are going to test your stamina, but they are in the Bible for a reason.

If you are taking suggestions I would start with the New Testament first and maybe read it a couple of times before moving to the OT. I would then read the Psalms and Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Genesis, Exodus. Then Joshua, Judges and through to the end of the OT in order saving Leviticus and numbers and Deuterronomy for last.

Even if you don't believe in God as you are reading, keep in the back of your head that this book, the Bible, that you are reading is God's word to mankind right now. What I mean is don't read it with the thought that this can't be true, read it with the idea that it could be true. If you can't do this, then at least read it with your mind in neutral, not leaning to one side or the other.

[edit on 17-7-2005 by dbrandt]



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Questioneverything
The new testament is a cut and paste job anyway and the inconsistencies in the bible are so big you cannot ignore them, when i researched this i wanted Jesus to be true so much but now i know his story is from pagan Gods especially Osisris-Dionysis.



Completely false. These inconsistencies have explanations and if you sincerely want to find out if the Bible is true, you can google plenty of sites that will explain the so-called inconsistencies.

I would like to know if you have read the Bible all the way through for yourself?



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Questioneverything
The new testament is a cut and paste job anyway and the inconsistencies in the bible are so big you cannot ignore them, when i researched this i wanted Jesus to be true so much but now i know his story is from pagan Gods especially Osisris-Dionysis.


The story you are about to read is true. The names have been changed to protect the innocent and hide the guilty. The places have been moved to hide the obvious truth that we were not just put here in a flash of light so-to-speak but that we traveled here long ago from far away to start a new way of life. It just so happens that maybe we could see some of our possible futures so we wrote it down and passed it around. But, as we all know, time changes history through the eye of the beholder. Yes there are great differences with the new and old testament however even the old testament is just a story with alot of metaphors that people throughout history have twisted into reasons to shove their ideaology down others throats usually manfesting itself into horrible acts of genocide. There are no excuses. We need to stop looking outside ourselves for our spitituality and start looking within. Only then will the people of Earth unite and evolve.



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by DjOsiris
Yes there are great differences with the new and old testament




Like..............?



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 09:11 PM
link   
Daniel is a must read if you want help with Revelation.
Revelation touches on many prophecies from the entire bible, but Daniel has much.

questioneverything

Maybe your post deserves its own thread instead of dragging this one into a 'fake/copy' fight?



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 09:58 PM
link   
The dead sea scrolls were a great source of original biblical works, scholars compared these original texts to what we now know in the bible and they were almost perfectly identical.

If the current text and translations can survive 1500 years of tranlations, I think we can be assured that they coudl last 3000 or more. Very special care has been taken to keep the word true.

The only problem comes in understanding the context of the time, and the symbology used in the prophacies, especialyl in revelations which uses a lot of allagories to Nero and the roman empire of the time that St. John wrote it during his exile



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 11:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by evanfitz
I guess the only way to truely find out is to read the bible from start to finish.
Something im going to try, just debating on how im going to start.


Not to be trite, but why not just start at Genesis and work forward to Revelation? Unless you're a really fast reader, plan to spend several months working your way through it.

That said, it's not clear that reading the rest of the Bible is going to help you understand Revelation much, because the popular notion is that it's a book of prophecy. It is, sort of, but it was prophecy geared toward the first century that mapped current events of that period to the book of Daniel and combined them with the expectation of Jesus' eminent return.

The Roman empire (the Dragon) and the whore of Babylon (1st century Judaism) are long gone. So is the beast (Nero) and false prophet (Caligula). The temple has already been desecrated (by Caligula) and destroyed (~70 CE).

The Catholic church reconciles these inconsistencies by asserting that the 1000 year reign is the reign of the church, and Jesus' return was spiritual not physical (the Catholic church is officially preterist, although many Catholics seem to be oblivious of that fact).

The current view of eschatology (premillennialism/dispensationalism/pre-trib), although ancient, really came to popularity in the 1800s at the hand of John Nelson Darby, and was largely responsible for the recreation of the nation of Israel following WWII (a self fulfilling prophecy). By then, dispensationalism was already the dominant view among evangelicals.



posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jehosephat
The dead sea scrolls were a great source of original biblical works, scholars compared these original texts to what we now know in the bible and they were almost perfectly identical.

If the current text and translations can survive 1500 years of tranlations, I think we can be assured that they coudl last 3000 or more. Very special care has been taken to keep the word true.

The only problem comes in understanding the context of the time, and the symbology used in the prophacies, especialyl in revelations which uses a lot of allagories to Nero and the roman empire of the time that St. John wrote it during his exile
I have a ? .... was not the Dead sea scrolls , just of the Old Testament? so that would leave out the New Testament right? I mean as being part of the scrolls. just wanted to add this si that no one gets confused



posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 01:47 AM
link   
There were two parts of the dead sea scrolls, manuscripts of the Old testement. The otehr part are religious writings of the Jews of the time, possibly the sect called "Essenes"

But I will also add, the King James bible printed in 1611 was written by monks who were using seveal translations of the time and manuscripts. Some additional manuscripts were found later and besides word order and spelling, there is no significant differance of content compared to the Bibles we have today. Except for some denominations like the Jehovah witnesses who like to make thier own translations to fit thier beliefs, but they are an exeption to the rule.

Suffice it to say, and corruption of the bible is usually based on unlterior motives of sinful humans, and can be easily be proven false by more mainstream professional scholars and translators.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join