Is this a hologram phenomenon described in ST. JOHN'S REVELATION ?

Is this a hologram phenomenon described in ST. JOHN'S REVELATION ?

chapter 13
15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.


What do you guys think?

could be many things, could be a swastika, could be the image of the almighty dollar, could be the crescent moon of Islam could even be the image of the crucifiction.

reply to post by Math(s)ew

---

Holograms don't "speak" - not as yet, anyway.
But I'll admit that the description bears an uncanny resemblance to a phenomenon called - TV.

It doesn't mean that's necessarily what it IS.

As any biblical historian will tell you: 'The Beast' was a code word for the Roman Emperor. And yes, worship of the Roman Emperor was common in those days. And yes, you could be put to death if you refused to do so. Many were.

Remember, it's commonly understood by experts on biblical theology that the guy who wrote revelation was as mad as a Hatter We're talking about a guy who halucinated constantly!!

Today, we put people like that into rubber rooms where they can't hurt others or themselves

J.

Yes, I believe it's part of it!
Look up past threads on the mark of the beast and holograms......

Jimbo, "any historian" my foot.
nero caesar was an archetype, much like his forefathers, nebuchadnezzar and other leaders who set themselves up for worship.
The Beast system from Babylon.

reply to post by Clearskies

---

Don't misquote me!

I said 'any biblical historian' - and yes, they would tell you this. It's about time more people on this board tried reading the works of qualified scholars in this field, instead of all the garbage they seem to trough on...

J.

exactly




I'll admit that I've come across with this idea several times but I think it's not that there's something more to it.




I think the word "speak" should be taken literally not metaphorically so swastika, dollar and crescent moon are almost for sure not that.




This argument is as old as world let's try some new ideas, besides you're missing the point, read carefully, I'm talking about " the image of the beast" not the beast itself.

Neither do holograms breathe. Here is a much more "faithful" translationPlease allow me to expound on this. This will be an artificially created biological entity. Either a, more probably, clone of the deceased original beast or the resurrected beast itself. At any rate, the original beast dies and the false prophet replaces it with the "image." Some more scriptures to back this up:the beastie dies a short while after assuming power...the "image of the beast" carries on for & after the original's death...

That, my friends, is the gospel truth of the matter.

Thank you, Reject. That is a welcome correction.
(Haven't had a pop quiz on apocalyptic knowledge in quite a while... :)

I appreciate your interpretation. It doesn't mean that I necessarily agree with it, but it is ingenious - and it shows personal thought, not rehashing "experts'" opinions...

Personally, I think the expressions should be interpreted with great caution. Semitic languages, as I am sure you know, LOVE metaphors, superlatives and such constructions (e.g. "king of kings" means simply "THE greatest king").
Which is why it is possible that "give breath" means simply to infuse, or to bring to, life. Now the presence of "life", of course, is usually judged by external signs - not necessarily breath itself, but other "vital signs" (like moving and speaking, for example). And if this man really was seeing images of something totally unfamiliar, therefore impossible to describe accurately, in today's terms - then just seeing the image speak or move could have been enough to make him use the expression "give breath to" = bring to life (meaning giving it a lifelike appearance?).

Another factor to consider is the possible influence of a tradition similar (or identical?) to the story of the Golem - and that one actually doesn't collide with your interpretation (not necessarily, that is).

I have a headache from not sleeping enough, and it shows in the poor quality of my exposition here. I am aware of that, and I am sorry. But I hope the core of it is intelligible enough.

BTW, if there are replies directly relating to my post, and I happen not to come back any time soon, I just want everyone to know that it won't be because I am ignoring you.




















[edit on 21-5-2008 by Vanitas]

reply to post by jimbo999

---

I happen to have the pleasure of knowing two of the leading - no, really - leading biblicists in the world. They are wonderful people, and they know A LOT. But that doesn't mean they are able - or even willing - to interpret the texts outside the rigid framework of a single interpretive perspective based on the available - and necessarily limited - data of PAST history.

And "hallucinations"...?
Where's the evidence of that term being anything but a childishly obtuse misnomer?
In fact, all the evidence - if interpreted without a specific bias - points towards perception of very real phenomena.












[edit on 21-5-2008 by Vanitas]

Maybe there's a reason it's old? No real reason to make new crap up, just to work yourself into a lather. All that will come of this thread is people picking their personal scapegoat for who the antichrist is.

lovely, I see that you feel the blues, I haven't thought about that



by the way the number of the beast which is 666 and is supposedly the number of the man (Nero and the old crap)but according to gematria the number of the man is 9, whereas 6+6+6=18=1+8=9 it means that man cannot reach above that because God is 1 and 10=1+0=1 He is alfa and omega, so basiclly I think we should look for a person which is a numerological 9th but not in Nero's times but now or in the future




scapegoat and antichrist don't mix like two dx