by Schizm 368 Replies latest watchtower bible
Schizm, we've never had the pleasure to introduce ourselves. As of which, I am curious of you're vulgar reply to me. When I added some more background information for any non-biased researcher to see and evaluate for themselves, it was not an attack on anybody. However, you appear to have taken this personally.What gives?
steve
I apologize. I do get a little defensive at times (I wonder why?). Feel free to add any background information that you wish.
.
Schizm,
Nothing in the Bible directly says that the reason the woman is seen sitting atop the beast is '''because her kingdom is over the kings of the earth". Your assertion is conjectured. (Not that I necessarily disagree with you.)
Once again, stating it doesn't make you correct:
Revelation 17:15-18 — And he says to me: “The waters that you saw, where the harlot is sitting, mean peoples and crowds and nations and tongues. 16 And the ten horns that you saw, and the wild beast, these will hate the harlot and will make her devastated and naked, and will eat up her fleshy parts and will completely burn her with fire. 17 For God put [it] into their hearts to carry out his thought, even to carry out [their] one thought by giving their kingdom to the wild beast, until the words of God will have been accomplished. 18 And the woman whom you saw means the great city that has a kingdom over the kings of the earth.”
Nothing in the Bible says she was ever anything other than a harlot.
I will revise my statement to make it more clear, if you prefer. Nothing in the Bible ever even remotely infers that she ever was anything other than a harlot. Whereas, there is not only a direct INFERENCE that she was over the kings of the earth, there is the direct STATEMENT that she was over the kings of the earth. There is the direct statement in another chapter that the Beast she rides is the eighth king. So, I don't have to rely on conjecture.
From which Scripture are you drawing your view that Babylon the Great was formerly NOT a harlot?
AuldSoul
From which Scripture are you drawing your view that Babylon the Great was formerly NOT a harlot?AuldSoul
Like I've said repeatedly--and which you've chosen to ignore--she is NOT Babylon the Great. She's Babylon the great city.
She's a harlot because of claiming to be Christian (a follower/servant of Christ), but then after the yet-to-arrive 8th King makes the scene and pressures peoples to accept the mark*, she willingly complies. She serves the 8th King instead of Christ, and that's the reason she is a harlot, and has the name of the beast written on her forehead.
* The "mark" signifies that the bearer accepts the 8th King's authority as being above that of God's. Which is the reason why faithful Christians will refuse to accept such mark. Because of their refusal to do so, the will become the focal point of attention, and not be allowed to participate in the economic process of buying and selling goods. At that point their very survival depends upon God's intervention, and it's then when Michael will stand up (Da 12:1) in their behalf (armageddon has begun).
.
"She has fallen! Babylon the Great has fallen!"
So, in your copy of the Bible this has a lowercase "g"? Which translation is that, sagacious one? Twice now you've announced your last word to me today and twice you have proved yourself incapable of failing to reply.
I quoted this in context earlier and you said that the phrase "Babylon the Great" did not apply to the Beast in this instance. To whom did it apply if not the harlot?
Nowhere does the Bible say the harlot bears the mark of the Beast. Nowhere does the Bible say the harlot once professed anything other than harlotry. You are making up meaning the Bible doesn't even hint at, the same meaning the WTS makes up in her case and different meanings in the case of the Beast and its name.
You are welcome to do so of course, but please spare me any digs at my intellect just because I don't chase after your utterly unfounded beliefs. Or, alternatively, stop telling me what the Bible means and show me what the Bible says. Just like the WTS, your skills leave you cold at that point, eh? You want to become like them? Keep prophesying without being told what to say, you'll get there. Who knows, you might be the founder of the next idiotic, life-stealing cult.
AuldSoul
"She has fallen! Babylon the Great has fallen!"So, in your copy of the Bible this has a lowercase "g"?
No, but it shoud have a lower case "g". Do you actually believe that there's a perfect translation on the planet?
Twice now you've announced your last word to me today and twice you have proved yourself incapable of failing to reply.
I'm a fool for saying anything to you in the first place, and this statement of yours proves it conclusively.
I quoted this in context earlier and you said that the phrase "Babylon the Great" did not apply to the Beast in this instance [Re 18:2]. To whom did it apply if not the harlot?
It applies to the harlot.
Nowhere does the Bible say the harlot bears the mark of the Beast. Nowhere does the Bible say the harlot once professed anything other than harlotry. You are making up meaning the Bible doesn't even hint at, the same meaning the WTS makes up in her case and different meanings in the case of the Beast and its name.
You're the same ole you, Auldie. I've gotten to where I pretty much know what your comeback is gonna be. You've convinced yourself that you're as wise as the next guy, and it makes you feel better about yourself for having left the WTS. Enjoy it while it lasts!
You are welcome to do so of course, but please spare me any digs at my intellect just because I don't chase after your utterly unfounded beliefs.
You're asking for a whole lot more than you deserve there, I think. BTW, do you ever practice what you preach?
Or, alternatively, stop telling me what the Bible means and show me what the Bible says.
The thing is, you can't be told nor shown what you don't want to see in the first place.
I only have one thing to say about the remainder of your post: "Tut, tut ... you bitter little boy."
.
Schizm: I'm a fool for saying anything to you in the first place...
Among other reasons, yes. I agree. The one who thinks he knows is done learning. In my opinion, anyone who cannot learn more is a fool.
“He who knows nothing is closer to the truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors.” — Thomas Jefferson
Proverbs 2:3-4 — "if, moreover, you call out for understanding itself and you give forth your voice for discernment itself, 4 if you keep seeking for it as for silver, and as for hid treasures you keep searching for it..."
You believe you know. I admit I do not. Because I do NOT know, I see the error of your assertions. Because you believe you know, you make yourself a fool. You have stopped searching because you think you have found something. You were apparently done with seeking on this point before you posted, so there really is no reason to pursue it further with you.
AuldSoul
You seem to me to be the type person that won't be satisfied without a physical confrontation. Is THAT what you're looking for? Have you bloodied anybody's nose recently, AuldSoul?
You were apparently done with seeking on this point before you posted, so there really is no reason to pursue it further with you.
I stated in my opening post that I KNEW the name of the beast. When a person has found the gold that he was searching for there's no further need to keep on "seeking" . You apparently don't understand that principle. I bet when you're clothes washing machine finishes washing your blue jeans that you start the cycle over and wash them over and over and over. Not even YOUR jeans could be THAT dirty!
.
Have you bloodied anybody's nose recently, AuldSoul?
Not since grade school. Although, even I were a brute I don't see what bearing that would have on the weight of my argument. The Bible calls her "Babylon the Great," do you know why they capitalized the "G"? If not, how do you know it was mistranslated? If your theories on understanding Revelation starts with a notion that anything disagreeing with your theory is mistranslated, I frankly don't have time for it.
Please let me know, up front, whether that is the case next time. I won't trouble your threads at all, if you start with a disclaimer that you arrived at your interpretation by discovering a mistranslation of the original texts. Once I see that, I will know there is no need for me to post in response.
I stated in my opening post that I KNEW the name of the beast.
Stated, "debated," and haven't demonstrated. You use every combination of logical fallacy in the book. You failed to argue your point.
AuldSoul
Auldie........oh!............can I call you Auldie too?
You must realise Auldsoul your talking to an older guy who's liferaft was taken from him and he can't get OVER it. Ol' Schizm still has hope for the WTBTS turning itself around and proving themselves to be gods only worthy people on planet earth and he's hopin to be around when the change take place as spoken of in the scripture he clings onto that solves this whole shitty mess. That scripture is
Dan 11:35
This is a discussion of the King of the North and South. I've taken the liberty to quote the chapter starting with some earlier verses. Schizm actually believes this "covenant people" spoken of here is the modern day Jehovahs Witnesses who are awaiting to be "refined".
28 "The king of the north will then return home with great riches. On the way he will set himself against the people of the holy covenant, doing much damage before continuing his journey.
29 "Then at the appointed time he will once again invade the south, but this time the result will be different. 30 For warships from western coastlands [c] will scare him off, and he will withdraw and return home. But he will vent his anger against the people of the holy covenant and reward those who forsake the covenant. 31 His army will take over the Temple fortress, polluting the sanctuary, putting a stop to the daily sacrifices, and setting up the sacrilegious object that causes desecration. [d] 32 He will flatter those who have violated the covenant and win them over to his side. But the people who know their God will be strong and will resist him.
33 "Those who are wise will give instruction to many. But for a time many of these teachers will die by fire and sword, or they will be jailed and robbed. 34 While all these persecutions are going on, a little help will arrive, though many who join them will not be sincere. 35) And some who are wise will fall victim to persecution. In this way, they will be refined and cleansed and made pure until the time of the end, for the appointed time is still to come.
What the dingleberry fails to see is verses 41 on. I guess he expects that about the time the WTBTS changes their blood, pedophile, DFing policies and a host of other bullshit they are involved in.....we can all expect these things in the East to take place. Poor Egypt, I hope the king of the North don't decimate the pyramids and stuff. And the poor Libyans and Ethiopians....slaves again! How awful!
41 He will enter the glorious land of Israel, and many nations will fall, but Moab, Edom, and the best part of Ammon will escape. 42 He will conquer many countries, and Egypt will not escape. 43 He will gain control over the gold, silver, and treasures of Egypt, and the Libyans and Ethiopians [f] will be his servants.
Gumby......shakin his head at poor ol' schizm
The Bible calls her "Babylon the Great," do you know why they capitalized the "G"?
If I were one of the Clergy, Auldie, I'd expect you to pay for the things I share with you:
Revelation 18 (New American Standard Bible) 2 And he cried out with a mighty voice, saying, "Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great!
Revelation 18 (New Living Translation) 2 He gave a mighty shout, "Babylon is fallen--that great city is fallen!
Revelation 18 (King James Version) 2 And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen,
Revelation 18 (Young's Literal Translation) 2 and he did cry in might -- a great voice, saying, `Fall, fall did Babylon the great,
