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: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 03:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jehosephat
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.
The Other part you are pointing to were the NagHammadi in upper Egypt? coorect. These were considered the Lost Gospels? well no one considers these important, because the church threw these ones out.
About the JW`s using their own bible, well I heard this was because the King James has over 50,000 errors that this is why they came out with the 1889 OR early 1900 revised edition?( between these dates sometime) correct me if I am wrong.
Also Sir Francis Bacon was the Editor of the King James, so he took out an added, right? is this what an Editor does? adds and takes?
oh yes, an Bacon was a Mason by the way. just in case anyone would like to know who edited the King James.




posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 04:54 AM
link   


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). ~snip~



The reason I stated to read Daniel and Revelation is because Daniel will help alot with understanding Revelation.
The reason I say you should read Revelation asap is because it is the only book in the bible that says you will receive a blessing by reading it.

As for the propecy....someone stated you should read Mark for help in Revelation...That is correct.

The book says the 7 heads are 7 kingdoms and 7 Kings.
5 are fallen, 1 is now , 1 is yet to come.
Daniel sheds light on that.
Rome could not be the end because they are the 'one is'.

The one that is to come has not come yet.

But all of thatis another thread tho



posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 08:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by jake1997
Rome could not be the end because they are the 'one is'.

The one that is to come has not come yet.


Are you talking about Daniel or Revelation?

[edit on 18-7-2005 by spamandham]



posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 03:51 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.


Which inconsistencies are you referring to.?Where is your evidence that the New Testament is a "cut and paste job".?How do you get to Osiris-Dionysis, one of whom was egyptian and the other greek.?

Please list sources and proofs for your contention, please.



posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by spamandham

Originally posted by jake1997
Rome could not be the end because they are the 'one is'.

The one that is to come has not come yet.


Are you talking about Daniel or Revelation?

[edit on 18-7-2005 by spamandham]


Rev 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.


So that is about the time of 90 AD.

Rome did not end until around 460 AD?

The next one...which coincides with Daniels iron/clay feet and toes has not come yet.

Daniel gives another clue as to who the last one is

Dan 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

The prince that shall come is the AC. The people of the prince that shall come is Rome because they are the ones that plowed Jerusalem under .

Using this we can show that the idea of Rome being all 7 kings or that Revelation is past already is incorrect.



posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by jake1997
Rev 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.


So that is about the time of 90 AD.

Rome did not end until around 460 AD?


...but the last emperor of Rome also did not happen in 90 AD. The horns of the beast of Revelation are kings of an empire, not new empires.


Originally posted by jake1997
The next one...which coincides with Daniels iron/clay feet and toes has not come yet.


Daniel's statue referred to empires, not kings. I don't see how you justify equating the horns of Revelation with the body parts of the statue of Daniel from a hermeneutical perspective.

Daniel gives another clue as to who the last one is


Originally posted by jake1997
The prince that shall come is the AC. The people of the prince that shall come is Rome because they are the ones that plowed Jerusalem under .


As you already pointed out, Rome is a dead empire. You will have to spinmeister something else to take the place of Rome, unless of course the Roman empire is reinstituted.



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by spamandham

Originally posted by jake1997
The prince that shall come is the AC. The people of the prince that shall come is Rome because they are the ones that plowed Jerusalem under .


As you already pointed out, Rome is a dead empire. You will have to spinmeister something else to take the place of Rome, unless of course the Roman empire is reinstituted.


Bingo! There you go. The Roman Empire will be reinstated under the Anti-Christ in the city of seven hills- sound familiar?




posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by lightseeker
Bingo! There you go. The Roman Empire will be reinstated under the Anti-Christ in the city of seven hills- sound familiar?


I'm not holding my breath for that one.



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by spamandham

Originally posted by jake1997
Rev 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.


So that is about the time of 90 AD.

Rome did not end until around 460 AD?


...but the last emperor of Rome also did not happen in 90 AD. The horns of the beast of Revelation are kings of an empire, not new empires.

we are not talking about the horns yet. Just the 7 heads.
The 10 horns reign at the same time as the 7th head.

Dan 2:38 and into whose hand he has given, wherever they dwell, the children of man, the beasts of the field, and the birds of the heavens, making you rule over them all--you are the head of gold.






Originally posted by jake1997
The next one...which coincides with Daniels iron/clay feet and toes has not come yet.


Daniel's statue referred to empires, not kings. I don't see how you justify equating the horns of Revelation with the body parts of the statue of Daniel from a hermeneutical perspective.


In Daniel, and Revelation...the symbols are both kings and kingdoms. Just as Babylon did not end when Nebby ended...neither did Rome begin or end with whoever was emperor during Jesus time.

The symbols are both kings and kingdoms


Daniel gives another clue as to who the last one is


Originally posted by jake1997
The prince that shall come is the AC. The people of the prince that shall come is Rome because they are the ones that plowed Jerusalem under .


As you already pointed out, Rome is a dead empire. You will have to spinmeister something else to take the place of Rome, unless of course the Roman empire is reinstituted.


Rome is 'the one that is now' in Revelation 17.
We know that a 7th one is coming.
Daniel tells us that 'the people of the prince that shall come will destroy the temple and jerusalem'.
The prince that shall come is the AC...the leader of the 7th head.

Now all we have to do is find out who destoryed Jerusalem and scattered the jews.

Rome.

Guess what

Rome is where the AC will come from

Guess what else...in 1948 Israel became a nation again.
In 1948
The Western Union Treaty (Brussels Treaty) is signed by Belgium, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom.

Guess how many are in that union today? 10
They also just signed a military pact and then used that treaty to intervene in africa.
The 10 horns

Do not count Rome out as head #7 just yet

[edit on 19-7-2005 by jake1997]



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 11:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by lightseeker

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.


Which inconsistencies are you referring to.?Where is your evidence that the New Testament is a "cut and paste job".?How do you get to Osiris-Dionysis, one of whom was egyptian and the other greek.?

Please list sources and proofs for your contention, please.
could I say something here about this subject, since I think I know what "Questaineverything" was trying to say. Osisris was the first one we read about in ancient egyptian history. Dionysis came later. It all depends on what part of the world you lived in at the time. Krishna was in India, an so on an so on. Its all through History, the Christ story.
Whats Important about this story is that they all taught Immortality. They all were born Dec 25 ( Winter Soltice) Born in a Manger, had a Virgin Mother, and Taught Immortality. There were many more and like I said it all depends on what part of the world you lived in. ( and when) but clearly the Christ story if one researches will see that its one an the same. Its the same message thats all. oh yes and my I add that they were all crucified,an came back. and will come back again to bring Peace on Earth.



posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 02:21 AM
link   
This isnt the place to cover that topic.

What you will find if you do some study beyond looking at antichristian websites is that those religions are a bit different then the bible. In fact, you will be able to see that the Greek, Egyptian, Babylonian, Persian, Roman, Navajo, Aztec, Japanese, Chinese, Polynesian, Hopi religions are all linkable back to sumeria. The reason is...they all had the same religion up until the Tower of Babel.

Like I said tho...that is another thread. Feel free to create it and link it from here if you want



posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 11:25 AM
link   
Oh, sorry , I was Just trying to clear up with Lightseeker, ??????`s about what "Questaineverything" was probley saying. This was brought up in the thread if you didnt notice. anyways thats what we are here for anyways to get other veiws about whats going on. I feel this is very important info. as far as researching History, many, many people are ignorant of this and dont even know about mythology. It all has its roots. and yes , it is the same story re-told.( my opinion of course)



posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 11:29 AM
link   
Also jake, I dont consider other point of views anti-anything.
I look at both sides and then decide for myself whats truth, I do have a mind of my own



posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by jake1997
we are not talking about the horns yet. Just the 7 heads.
The 10 horns reign at the same time as the 7th head.


Rev. 17 also makes it clear it is talking about kings, not nations. Although I accept the argument that a reference to a specific king can be a generic reference to the nation, this is not universally true. Since Revelation is based in part on Daniel, it's proper to make a distinction between kings and empires as necessary to harmonize these two texts.

Daniel 2:29-45 clarifies that there are 4 great empires in question. Empires of old consisted of a collection of vassal kingdoms, so multiple kings were associated with a single empire. The heads and horns are used interchangably to represent vassal kingdoms and their kings.

Rome is clearly the fourth empire of Daniel according to the writer of Revelation, as you correctly pointed out. The expectation was that Jesus would return when the next Caesar took over.

Revelation is widely accepted to have been written during the reign of Domitian, so Jesus should have returned during the reign of Vespian.

But it get's more complicated than that, because 666 likely represents Nero, so although Revelation was probably written in the late 1st century, it seems to include pieces of an earlier story when Nero was Caesar. To add a little more confusion, there is debate whether the number is 666 or 616. If it's 616, it would likely have represented Caligula, who actually did defile the temple by setting up a statue of himself (the abomination).

So looking at Revelation from a historical perspective, it picked up at some point as an ancient astrological myth adding onto Daniel. In the 1st century, the story evolved to add Caligula, who's number was 616. When the temple was destroyed (70CE), the number was changed to 666 to represent Nero, but the details about the temple desecration were not removed. The beast was changed again to refer to the Caesar to follow Domitian, but the number of the beast was not altered.



posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chasrac64

could I say something here about this subject, since I think I know what "Questaineverything" was trying to say. Osisris was the first one we read about in ancient egyptian history. Dionysis came later. It all depends on what part of the world you lived in at the time. Krishna was in India, an so on an so on. Its all through History, the Christ story.
Whats Important about this story is that they all taught Immortality. They all were born Dec 25 ( Winter Soltice) Born in a Manger, had a Virgin Mother, and Taught Immortality. There were many more and like I said it all depends on what part of the world you lived in. ( and when) but clearly the Christ story if one researches will see that its one an the same. Its the same message thats all. oh yes and my I add that they were all crucified,an came back. and will come back again to bring Peace on Earth.


There is one big difference between all the people you mentioned and Jesus Christ: No one else preached that He was God incarnate and that he could forgive our sins. Also, no other person ever died on a cross and then rose from the dead.



posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by lightseeker
There is one big difference between all the people you mentioned and Jesus Christ: No one else preached that He was God incarnate and that he could forgive our sins. Also, no other person ever died on a cross and then rose from the dead.


I would have thought you would respond that the biggest difference was that Jesus was real and the others are myth.

The others were also god/men, and although the mechanism of death may be unique, the rising from the dead part is not.

All of these myths derive from astronomical observations. The god that dies and rises from the dead is the sun, that 'dies' each night and rises from the 'dead' every morning.

The number 12 is significant because there are 12 constellations along the path the sun follows in the sky.

The number 4 is significant because there are 4 seasons.

The number 7 is important because there are 7 eye-visible non-stationary celestial objects; the sun, the moon, mars, venus, mercury, jupiter, and saturn

The fish symbol is important because the first century saw the dawn of the age of Pisces (the fish). The fish symbol predates the ichthus acronym made up later on to harmonize the use of this pagan symbol.

The symbol of the cross traces it's roots to the monuments of Asherah, the consort of El in the ancient Cannanite national religion. Similar symbols show up in other cultures that are more clearly recognized as symbols of the Milky Way.

etc.



posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chasrac64
Also jake, I dont consider other point of views anti-anything.
I look at both sides and then decide for myself whats truth, I do have a mind of my own


Sorry

There has been alot of that Jesus is really this pagan god stuff going around ats lately. The source is what I was looking at



posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by lightseeker

Originally posted by Chasrac64

could I say something here about this subject, since I think I know what "Questaineverything" was trying to say. Osisris was the first one we read about in ancient egyptian history. Dionysis came later. It all depends on what part of the world you lived in at the time. Krishna was in India, an so on an so on. Its all through History, the Christ story.
Whats Important about this story is that they all taught Immortality. They all were born Dec 25 ( Winter Soltice) Born in a Manger, had a Virgin Mother, and Taught Immortality. There were many more and like I said it all depends on what part of the world you lived in. ( and when) but clearly the Christ story if one researches will see that its one an the same. Its the same message thats all. oh yes and my I add that they were all crucified,an came back. and will come back again to bring Peace on Earth.


There is one big difference between all the people you mentioned and Jesus Christ: No one else preached that He was God incarnate and that he could forgive our sins. Also, no other person ever died on a cross and then rose from the dead.

You are right, and in my opinion, i feel that they have changed things over time. Dont get me wrong I believe in The Man of Galilee, and his message, I just believe in this message in a different way that you and Jake feel. but thats ok because you can see with "Questaineverything" answear that things do over time gets confused alot with other myths.



posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by jake1997

Originally posted by Chasrac64
Also jake, I dont consider other point of views anti-anything.
I look at both sides and then decide for myself whats truth, I do have a mind of my own


Sorry

There has been alot of that Jesus is really this pagan god stuff going around ats lately. The source is what I was looking at
yes there is and I feel this is why because when one does his search he see this. we will just stick to what this thread was intended, I just thought i was being of some help in trying to clear something up for truthseeker. thats all
sorry



posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 11:31 PM
link   
Isn't the Revelations one of the older and later added pieces to the new testament? I heard that the seven headed beast reffers to Rome (seven hills). And that the whole thing is an anology of the destruction of Rome fueled by old Jewish resentment and Christian persecution.



new topics




 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join