Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Revelation; The Lamb and the scroll

page: 2
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 11:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI

Originally posted by Greensage
Sorry, if it isn't in there then it was removed! Reincarnation is no more a fable than half of what you propose, and those who can prove it have proved it and legitimized it, it is only some folks don't believe in it. I am pretty certain a majority do, and they represent a diverse and far-reaching population.

You're confusing two different issues here.
Whether reincarnation is true; that is one issue.
Whether reincarnation is in the Bible; that is a completely different issue.
My comment was made on the second question.
You are arguing, in effect, "reincarnation is true, therefore it must have been in the Bible", which is bad logic. One does not follow from the other.
If you want to argue that reincarnation was removed from the Bible, you must present evidence that it was ever there in the first place.


Well that is silly unless you think my belief in reincarnation is the breath of my message, it is only the part you cannot comprehend as being a part of the Bible, but yet I provided you with an ATS link of many valuable arguments for both sides. I only presented that Thread because reincarnation got you fixated, it is not about whether or not is is "True". Geez'us Louise'us

So I see this statement of yours as silly because you think my thoughts are not worth your time but you can point out a flaw based on something you cannot prove otherwise either. Saying that because it is not there does not make it any less of a valid belief. Besides, I did use parenthesis to isolate the thought from my meanderings. Silly really that feeling I am getting from your "freak out", it sort of validates my thoughts that we really are the Horsemen and that we brought all of those things upon ourselves.

If you find yourself without those extra incarnations, perhaps you don't have any, I don't see why the rest of my post would warrant such a display of arrogance. It is arrogant to think you know what was or what wasn't Truth. It is about the factual basis of our Reality here on Planet Earth, that within us resides the Blood of our Lord. Our DNA will unlock the Truth, that is the Scroll, within, not in some ethereal existence with a make-shift belief that the Lamb resides outside of us. My thoughts include everyone as I "keep it real" to our Real dilemmas, such as "inevitable Doom". Shame on me for insinuating that reincarnation was stripped from the Bible! Blaspheme!

I think I am a thorn in your thoughts. I will leave this post alone, I got the revelation I needed for one night!




posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 04:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Greensage
So I see this statement of yours as silly because you think my thoughts are not worth your time but you can point out a flaw based on something you cannot prove otherwise either. Saying that because it is not there does not make it any less of a valid belief. Besides, I did use parenthesis to isolate the thought from my meanderings. Silly really that feeling I am getting from your "freak out", it sort of validates my thoughts that we really are the Horsemen and that we brought all of those things upon ourselves.

I apologise for taking one part of your post and ignoring the rest.
This was really because engaging with the rest of your thoughts involved harder work.
I will put in the work later today.

I'm a little surprised, though, that my mildly expressed comments can be called a "freak out". Did I start laying into reincarnation, saying that it was a lot of nonsense? I just confined myself to the factual point and held back my thoughts on the doctrinal issue.


. It is arrogant to think you know what was or what wasn't Truth. It is about the factual basis of our Reality here on Planet Earth, that within us resides the Blood of our Lord. Our DNA will unlock the Truth, that is the Scroll, within, not in some ethereal existence with a make-shift belief that the Lamb resides outside of us.

As I said, I will need to get back to all this later. But I must query "make-shift" as a description of what is, after all, a natural reading of the text. My approach is based on keeping Revelation in the context of the rest of the Bible, and assuming that the Biblical purpose is consistent. I would have thought that interpretations based on topical and temporary ideas like the possible effect of imminent solar flares deserve that label better.




edit on 28-9-2010 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 07:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Greensage
Think about the 4 Horseman as representing us as Races!

To be honest, my first mental reaction to this line of thought was that it was clearly different from the approach I've already adopted elsewhere, but the differences would not be easy to disentangle, and they were not so great that I felt an immediate need to take you up on them. But since you took this neglect as disrespectful, I'll apologise and settle down to examining the difference between the two approaches.

I originally set out my own understanding in
The 4 Horsemen-Why? and
The 4 Horsemen-How?
(I give the second thread its original title. Changing it at the last minute was a misjudgement)

In the first thread, I was looking at the purpose of ch6, the various indications that it's meant to be seen as God's response to the oppression of his people, his way of dealing with the oppressors. You don't bring in that angle, but we could probably agree that the punishments in this chapter come close to being "self-inflicted".

In the second thread, I was looking at what the "four horsemen" event would look like in practice, on the ground. The main point was that I saw them as adding up to a single world-catastrophe, with the three death-dealing horses of Plague, War, and Famine coming virtually together, while Death itself, the fourth horseman, followed on closely behind picking up the corpses.
On the individual horses;
I take the traditional view that the first horse is "Plague". If people take it as "Conquest", it's encroaching on the territory that belongs to "War". These are four distinct horses, doing distinct jobs.
The red horse takes peace away from the whole world, being part of the effect on "a quarter of the earth". So assigning this horse to "the red race" doesn't really work.
Similarly the black horse is not just experiencing famine, but actually bringing famine to the world as a whole.
So I would rather take "war" and "famine" as "the fact that there is war" and "the fact that there is famine", than apply them to more specific entities.


The 6th Seal is likely the receiving of our Galactic Overbearing Gamma Burst that will blast our Sun and blast the Earth!

I think this is too early in the narrative.
Taking Revelation as a whole, there's a very clearly defined gap between the end of the sixth seal and the "trumpets", when the expression of God's wrath upon the world is temporarily halted. It lasts from ch7 v1 to ch8 v7, and it;s summed up in the phrase "silence in heaven". So any real "end-of-the-world" events would belong rather to the time of the "trumpets".

Returning to the Lamb, because this is important. The Lamb identifies the one specific individual, Jesus, because he was the one who died. We did not die on the cross, except in the Pauline sense that we have died "together with him", that we were "baptised into his death" (assuming that we've been baptised). And this matches the fact that the New Testament identifies Jesus as "Lord", ie the one who is above us. The followers of Christ are described as members of a "body", but he is the "head" of that body. The Lamb is the one other than ourselves who is leading the way- we're the ones who are following.

edit on 28-9-2010 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI

Originally posted by slinger
Jesus cannot open the scroll until he defeats satin on earth, And fulfills yet another prophecy?

As I understand the scene, Jesus can open the scroll because he has already defeated Satan on the Cross.
That is what is meant by the statement that the lion has "conquered".
The opening of the scroll then symbolises the final defeat of Satan on earth, which is the side-effect of his defeat on the Cross.


No the death on the cross was the Atonement for our sins not the defeat of satin,Jesus never battled satin on earth,this time he will. The Lion is this, Jesus came as a Lamb the first time,this time he comes as the lion to defeat satin and banish him from the earth. I have studied this subject for 25 years, Jesus is not coming to make friends he is coming this time to do battle ! The first time he came to prove to you his love.This time it will be time for us to prove our love for him but that is another subject wont go into it,on this post.



posted on Sep, 29 2010 @ 12:49 AM
link   
The first seal, a white horse (righteousness), a rider wearing a crown (a king), a bow and no arrows (promise and peace) went forth conquering and to conquer.

Zechariah 4:6
Then he answered and spake unto me, saying, This is the word of the LORD unto Zerubbabel, saying, Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the LORD of hosts.


The second seal, a red horse (blood of Lamb), its rider granted to take peace from the earth that they should kill each other (word of God)

Matthew 10:34
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword


Third seal, a black horse (judgement) its rider has a pair of scales (justice) a voice comes from the midst and lays it out. Rely on your own righteousness and be weighed in the balances if you will but wouldn't you rather be oil and wine?

Jeremiah 23:5
Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.


Fourth seal, a pale horse (fear) and Death sat on it and Hell followed.

Luke 12:5
But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him



posted on Sep, 29 2010 @ 02:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by slinger
Jesus cannot open the scroll until he defeats satin on earth,


I refer you to the words of the living creatures and elders, which seem clear enough;
"Worthy art thou to take the scroll and to open its seals..."
Why? What reason do they give?
"...for thou wast slain and by thy blood didst ransom men for God"

Yes, there is a later battle. This happens in ch19. The opening of the scroll happens in ch6, which is thirteen chapters earlier than the battle. So the opening of the scroll leads into the battle, rather than the other way round.










edit on 29-9-2010 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2010 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI

Originally posted by slinger
Jesus cannot open the scroll until he defeats satin on earth,


I refer you to the words of the living creatures and elders, which seem clear enough;
"Worthy art thou to take the scroll and to open its seals..."
Why? What reason do they give?
"...for thou wast slain and by thy blood didst ransom men for God"

Yes, there is a later battle. This happens in ch19. The opening of the scroll happens in ch6, which is thirteen chapters earlier than the battle. So the opening of the scroll leads into the battle, rather than the other way round.

I get what you are seeing but,thou wast slain as a man by men not satin,ransom for men, but you need to read the old testament Daniel chaps 7,8,9 it is the old testaments book of revelation,also if I remember correct Deuteronomy I think has some end time prophecy also,And you will know The USA will not be a factor as a nation in the end! Man now I have to get the book out and search,some reading for you. What I'm saying is the scroll is the means that gives satin his Final Judgement so to speak,that is why its opened first maybe I didn't put it clear,not a writer here sorry,In other words men are the ransom or the pay sort of for now Jesus must banish satin for God I gave you the soul of man now you punish satin,follow? Which leads to the rapture to make the army of Jesus! also you must remember the bible as we have it is not a complete book in any manner,lots of things are not in the correct order and left out,the king James bible was a 2nd condensing of the bible the first was removed by king James as he feared it would lead to the people revolting as the bible shows we do not need governments leading us(whole other thread so I'll stop now) So its the fullfilment of the scroll really how I should have put it,not open








edit on 29-9-2010 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



edit on 29-9-2010 by slinger because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2010 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Greensage
 


The complete Greek and Hebrew bible does speak of reincarnation,and also tells this is not the first earth! neither of which has any real meaning in our life,so the study of it is a moot point,knowing it will not help get you in Gods favor,so it was left on the cutting room floor when the bible was condensed for the common man to understand with out spending a life time studying it.



posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 02:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by slinger
The complete Greek and Hebrew bible does speak of reincarnation,and also tells this is not the first earth!

I'm going to have to challenge you to produce
a) The exact wording of the references to "reincarnation" which you say were left out. If you quote them in Greek or Hebrew I will be able to cope..
b) The exact location in the Bible from which they were supposed to be removed. Because, as I said to Greensage, there is no obvious context where the subject would have been discussed. Especially since Paul is saying things like "We shall be with the Lord for evermore", which is in direct conflict with the idea.
c) Some actual evidence that it was ever present and later removed. Please specify any actual manuscripts or old printed copies of the Bible which contain references to reincarnation. "Everybody says so on the internet" is not good enough.


edit on 30-9-2010 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 03:06 AM
link   
reply to post by iamnot
 

Thank you for that contribution.
I was convinced that I had replied to you yesterday morning, but apparently I didn't.
I know that I was going to refer you to the links I put up a couple of posts back.
The only real difference is my conviction that all four horses are meant to be seen as part of the destructive judgement.



posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 


I will go to work and find it for you,The Hebrew bible also says that when you die you go to heaven or you cease to exist! I believe you go to hell for punishment and then you cease to exist ! I think this verse is a confirmation of just that

Revelation chap 2 verse 11 "He that hath an ear,let him hear what the spirit saith unto the churches; He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death.

To the Jewish people ceasing to exist is the worst fate one can have to have never existed,I as a christian believe in hell
but I think the Hebrew is correct also and that is what this verse is lending itself to,I know what you are going to say to that but I'll wait



posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 06:33 PM
link   
judaism.about.com... This is a link to get you started
I made a call to get a clearer pix for ya



posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by slinger
I will go to work and find it for you,The Hebrew bible also says that when you die you go to heaven or you cease to exist! I believe you go to hell for punishment and then you cease to exist ! I think this verse is a confirmation of just that

It may well say that, but that isn't reincarnation.
Is it possible that we're getting into confusion about what the word "reincarnation" actually means?
Let's just check that we're not talking about different things.
I think that "Incarnation" means taking on a physical body, and "reincarnation" means taking on a physical body more than once. What do you think it means?


The comment about "the second death" is a reference forward to what happens in ch20, which is subsequent to a resurrection, which is a one-off event, and resurrection, as Paul tells you in 1 Corinthians ch15, is to a spiritual body. "Reincarnation" is about repeated returns to the same kind of physical body. A different religion altogether.


edit on 30-9-2010 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 


I think reincarnation is your soul comes back,incarnation is the divine coming back or taking on a human life, If I mistook you sorry but in that case no we (humans) cannot incarnate.

As for the second death,you sort of got it remember your soul is still in hell the second death comes at the end of your time in hell your soul dies(ceases to exist) As far as God is concerned you at that time (sent to hell) you are pretty much dead to him at that point so gray area? your body is not your life just a vessel for your life,it is your soul that is the life in your body,when your body dies you haven't died yet just your worldly body,or true death is when nothing is left at all. Or how can we suffer in hell but that the soul is still alive to suffer? What do you think about, When Jesus appered to mary in the tomb he had to tell her he was Jesus he did not look the same why?

edit on 30-9-2010 by slinger because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by slinger
 

I agree that "Incarnation" is what Christ does in taking on his humanity. I only brought it up to make clear the derivation of the word "reincarnation". So we agree on the meaning of the word, and you still need to provide evidence that that sense was ever included in Hebrew or Greek Bibles. The idea is in flat contradiction to the rest of the New Testament, which only talks about resurrection.



posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 


I have to get hold of an old friend to get the place it is, but if you look at how Jesus called John the baptist Elijah more than once and many think it alludes to reincarnation as happening,BUT the big but, john was asked if he was and he said no,if you think of it like the Jews he would not have know he was. And If he was,it (reincarnation)ended when Jesus came,he is now and forever the second chance! So as I said before,it is a moot point. But I will get hold of Scott to get the place and interpretation for it,he is a friend of mine that has a Hebrew bible and has also studied the Greek version too



posted on Oct, 1 2010 @ 02:17 AM
link   
reply to post by slinger
 

Before you get into interpretation of the Bible, don't forget that the point I originally challenged you on was;
""Reincarnation was in the Hebrew and Greek Bbles and later removed".
So I challenged you to provide the wording and original location of those removed statements, and evidence that they had ever been there. That is the subject of the conversation.If you're happy to admit that you were mistaken on that point, we can move on to other things.



posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 03:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Greensage
If you find yourself without those extra incarnations, perhaps you don't have any, I don't see why the rest of my post would warrant such a display of arrogance. It is arrogant to think you know what was or what wasn't Truth. It is about the factual basis of our Reality here on Planet Earth, that within us resides the Blood of our Lord. Our DNA will unlock the Truth, that is the Scroll, within, not in some ethereal existence with a make-shift belief that the Lamb resides outside of us. My thoughts include everyone as I "keep it real" to our Real dilemmas, such as "inevitable Doom". Shame on me for insinuating that reincarnation was stripped from the Bible! Blaspheme!

I think you've rather gone off at a tangent here, "freaking out", to use your own phrase.
Nothing in my comments constituted a claim to know "what was or wasn't Truth".
You had asserted that reincarnation had been removed from the Bible, which was a historical claim.
I had challenged this historical statement and asked for evidence that reincarnation teaching had ever been there.
And I did not accuse you of Blasphemy- I just accused you of historical inaccuracy. But the fact that you evade the question of evidence by flying into a rage proves my point very effectively. The doctrine of "reincarnation" was never in the Bible.

I have apologised in an earlier post for ignoring the main thrust of your first post. and I've now made comments on it.
edit on 12-11-2010 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 10:44 AM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 





The scroll belongs to "the one seated on the throne", who's holding it in his hand. It's clearly full of detailed information, written on both sides. But the scroll has been sealed- with seven seals, which means that God placed them there himself. And the annnouncement is made that somebody must be found to open it.


It can be asked if this is some kind of ethereal throne created through the poetic imagination?
Since God placed the seals on the scroll it becomes the task of prospective readers to break the seals as a prerequisite to reading the ~scroll?


Could also be expressed similar to Dan Browns Cryptex which contained a secret scroll written on both sides.
Davinci created something like this.


The cryptex works "much like a bicycle's combination lock", and if one arranges the disks to spell out the correct password, "the tumblers inside align, and the entire cylinder slides apart" (p. 200). In the inner compartment of the cryptex, secret information can be hidden, written on a scroll of thin papyrus wrapped around a fragile vial of vinegar as a security measure: if one does not know the password but tries to prise the cryptex open by force, the vial will break and the vinegar will dissolve the papyrus before it can be read.
edit on 2-12-2010 by Bordon81 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bordon81
Since God placed the seals on the scroll it becomes the task of prospective readers to break the seals as a prerequisite to reading the ~scroll?

In that case, surely, the image would indicate that the scroll was still sealed?
Whereas we're specifically told that the scroll has been opened (by the Lamb).
And we're even shown what the contents are (PS the events of ch6 are the contents of the scroll)





new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join