wild beast

by erik 20 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  JanH

  The author obviously intended the beast to refer to the Roman empire. The beast is not that unlike the 4th beast in Daniel, but whether the author of Revelation thought Daniel's beast referred to Rome is unclear. The 10 kings is not a symbolic number, it is the actual number of Roman emperors up to John's time. The "harlot" is most certainly Rome; the "seven hills" leaves little doubt about that. A semi-credible alternative is that it refers to Jerusalem, stating it was "the city where our Lord was crucified."

  The symbolics in Revalation is pretty well understood by modern Bible scholars. Of course, to people who desperately try to pin this book's symbols to modern groups and events, the book will remain closed, as it is for the WTS.

  - Jan
  --
  "Doctor how can you diagnose someone with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and then act like I had some choice about barging in here right now?" -- As Good As It Gets
• 

  NameWithheld

  It was prophetic writings of a rather large dump I took yesterday - it had seven heads and ten corns! Then I followed up with a one headed 2 corned poop. John obviously had this in mind when he wrote it.

  The sad thing? My intrepretaion is JUST as valid as nay other religions. Espcially the WTBTS...
• 

  Trevor Scott

  Erik,

  I recommend reading this article, by Carl Olof Jonsson - The League of Nations and the United Nations in Prophetic Speculation: http://user.tninet.se/~oof408u/fkf/english/un.htm

  It demonstrates how the WTS views on the identity of the wild beast, and their supposed prophecies regarding the demise of the League of Nations and "revival" of the UN were not at all prophetic or unique.

  Many fundamentalist Christians believe there is a correlation between the wild beast with seven heads and ten horns, and the UN. What the WTS would have you believe is unique, is really not unique at all.

  Much like the 1914-Gentile Times doctrine, the WTS "borrowed" this teaching from "Christendom".

  TS,
• 

  Lefty

  JanH,

  Having revealed the following about yourself, on your personal site, how is it that you feel that you are qualified to interpret the Bible, a book that you obviously don't even believe in ... particularly in regards to the Revelation account regarding what the 7-headed 10-horned beast represents?--lefty.

  I'm not religious. I don't believe in any ‘supernatural agents’ -- gods or God -- and I don't particularly disbelieve it either.
• 

  NameWithheld

  You know what they say, "righty tighty, lefty loosey"!
• 

  RedhorseWoman

  Lefty, what does JanH's religious philosophy (or lack thereof) have anything to do with whether or not he can offer an interpretation for Revelation?

  Are non-Chinese precluded from ordering Chinese food?
• 

  Utopian Reformist

  Lefty:

  In order to learn as much as possible from this forum (if that is your goal), my friendly advice is to "unlearn" some unproductive JW habits, namely determining the validity of information based primarily on someone's personal character.

  Remember, many of humanity's greatest contributors led controversial lives and practiced controversial behavior, however this did not diminish their accomplishments. Consider Michelangelo, DaVinci, Shakespear, etc..

  So, if JANH offers a researched (JANH researched everything--trust me) opinion and interpretation regarding certain portions of the Bible, he is just as qualified, entitled and free to do so as anyone else, and likewise he is just as unqualified as anyone else, all things being equal. Understand? This is freedom, taste it--don't judge it!
• 

  Seeker

  how is it that you feel that you are qualified to interpret the Bible, a book that you obviously don't even believe in

  So Christians are unqualified to read the Book of Mormon and tell what it is about? Or the Qu'ran? Or Hindu writings? Or Confucious' sayings?

  I don't follow this logic.
• 

  JanH

  lefty,

  Having revealed the following about yourself, on your personal site, how is it that you feel that you are qualified to interpret the Bible, a book that you obviously don't even believe in ...

  How can you ask such a question? It doesn't make sense at all.

  This is essentially the same you said some while back. The "argument" seems to be that only those who already believe in supernaturalism will accept the "evicence" for it.

  The nonsensical rants of religionists who try to "interprete" ancient sacred texts to mean something to our day all have one thing in common: they are wrong. Their attempts to predict the near future using old books like Daniel or Revelation has been a massive failure. The WTS is not unique in this respect, perhaps except that they have published more than the usual number of such false prophecies.

  The project to understand a human writing as a human writing has, on the other hand, been very successfull in interpreting and understanding these texts. We take historical and contextual facts into considerations, instead of dreaimg up fantasies based on a word here, a phrase there, disconnected from both historial and textual contexts.

  - Jan
  --
  "Doctor how can you diagnose someone with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and then act like I had some choice about barging in here right now?" -- As Good As It Gets
• 

  Lefty

  JanH,

  Okay, well let's see just how good you are at interpretation of the Book that you consider uninspired. How about if I provide you with a rather simple challenge? As you might have noticed up above, I made the following assertion:

  For solid reasons, the 10 horns should be pictured as all being on top of only one head of ... the beast out of the sea. That particular head would numerically, or sequentially, be considered to be the 7th.

  Do you agree with what I said there? or disagree? And if by chance you DO happen to agree, upon what basis? ... how can you scripturally prove that the 10 horns all belong upon one head instead of their being distributed amongst the entire complement of heads, such as is wrongly represented in the case of the image I posted above … which, BTW, is also the way that the WTS generally has them pictured? As for myself, I find it a little difficult to comprehend how that interpreters can overlook the obvious clues that unmistakably determine the placement of the 10 horns.--lefty.