Rev. 16:19 ?

by A&S 12 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • A&S
    A&S

    The B.S. this week dealt with this verse . But it doesn't make sense . (like any of it does )

    It says : And the great city split into three parts , AND the cities of the nations fell , AND Babylon the Great was remembered in the site of God , to give her the cup of the wine of the anger of his wrath .

    The Rev. book pg 234 par . 38 says that the "great city" is Babylon the great . But by using the word "and " to seperate the phrases it looks to me like they are different . Anyone have any comments on this for me ? Thanks

    P.S. How do you copy and paste here ?

  • JCanon
    JCanon

    I tried to copy-paste but kept getting an error message.

    JC

  • still_in74
    still_in74
    It says : And the great city split into three parts , AND the cities of the nations fell , AND Babylon the Great was remembered in the site of God , to give her the cup of the wine of the anger of his wrath .

    you know I had a problem with this scripture too but not in the same manor as you. I was frustrated by the WTS explanation that the splitting of BTG into 3 parts symbolized complete destruction from which she would never be rebuilt.

    Why is it that numerous scriptures in Revelation speak in 3's (sea, air, earth / trees, vegetation, grass/ etc.) and in each instance the 3 parts each mean something. Why has the author now decided to break his M.O. and have these 3 parts just mean complete destruction??

    To me, this is eisegesis. These 3 parts must have individual importance/meaning.

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    Actually this is one area where there is quite a bit of disagreement among scholars. The phrase "great city" refers to two different cities in Revelation, Jerusalem as it is in ch. 11 and Babylon-Rome as it is in ch. 17-18. The book has a complex (and composite?) structure which makes such references ambiguous, or at least difficult. On the one hand, the motif of an earthquake striking the city is shared with the reference to Jerusalem in ch. 11. On the other hand, the reference to the Parthians a few verses earlier and Babylon-Rome in the same verse points towards Rome. Yet we have Palestinian-Judean geography in v. 26 with the reference to Har-Mageddon. The use of kai "and" in the NT is also ambiguous, it could occur with either a continuation on the same theme or a change of reference. On balance, I think most conclude that the reference is to Babylon-Rome, because the section that directly follows in ch. 17-18 elaborates on the fall of Babylon-Rome. What happens in 16:19 is not the destruction of the city. The earthquake sunders the city into three parts, but the city is only destroyed and burned with fire when the client kings (who were gathered together at Har-Mageddon in ch. 16) attack the city itself.

  • M.J.
    M.J.

    Bottom line. It's a nice theory. That's about it, and that's how it should be humbly presented.
    Yet they elevate themselves as authorities on something beyond what "the message" itself reveals.

    This is rather like the scenario of a slave of a king being sent to deliver a message (as described in ISOCF), but impressed with his own importance, he embellishes it, adds to it, then insists that all hearers should accept whatever he presented as a royal order.

  • kwr
    kwr
    P.S. How do you copy and paste here ?

    When writing a message use the CTRL-V key combination after copying the text.

  • sacolton
    sacolton

    Yes, you have to forget what the WTBTS taught you. The bible doesn't move Babylonian - it's still exactly where it has always been.
    The Great Babylon consists of Iraq, Jordan, Rome and Egypt. At some point, they will all merge together into one empire.

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia
    Why is it that numerous scriptures in Revelation speak in 3's (sea, air, earth / trees, vegetation, grass/ etc.) and in each instance the 3 parts each mean something. Why has the author now decided to break his M.O. and have these 3 parts just mean complete destruction??

    Actually, the scenario is definitely not one involving "complete destruction". The destruction from the seven plagues (which is exegetically based on the ten plagues of Egypt in Exodus, cf. the affliction of festering sores in v. 2, turning water to blood in v. 3-4, darkness in v. 8, frogs in v. 13, hail in v. 21, drying up the waters in v. 12-13) in ch. 15-16 is necessarily incomplete because its purpose is to torture the peoples into repentance (cf. especially v. 9, 11, 21). It is in the parallel vision of the seven trumpets in ch. 8-11 where the fraction of one-third is especially prominent and stereotyped. This vision is also based on motifs of the ten plagues of Egypt, and the seven woes again are intended to represent incomplete destruction: "A third of humanity was killed by these three plagues ... the rest of humanity, those not killed by these plagues, did not repent of the products of their own manufacture, that is, they did not cease to worship the demons, or idols made of gold and silver and bronze and stone and wood" (9:18-20). The fraction of one-third is probably used because it implies that the majority of mankind survives the plague, to be tormented at a later time by another series of plagues, and then finally to be destroyed at the end of the world. In other words, the apocalypse is written in a way that implies that God would give mankind many opportunities to repent from their idolatry (e.g. the seven seals in ch. 6-7, the seven trumpets in ch. 8-11, the seven bowls of ch. 15-16) before he finally destroys them all in ch. 19.

  • VoidEater
    VoidEater

    Anyone have any comments on this for me ?

    Just that I don't think it is meant to be a prophetic work, and we today lack an everyday context in which it can have much meaning.

  • lesterd
    lesterd

    Remeber too, that the number three is an incomplete earthly number and would not typify completion of anything, the number seven is heavenly completness and is used in the complete destruction of Babylon.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit