Daniel, Revelation & World History Reveal The Antichrist

[look3467]

Anyone who thinks the apocalyptic passages in Daniel and Revelation have anything literal to say about modern times is abysmally ignorant of history and the Bible's historical context. Unthinking Biblical literalism is one of the biggest impediments to really understanding Christianity and the modern world, and a boon to intolerance, ignorance, and stupidity>>>Dexter

Based on"history and Bible's historical context", can you kindly tell me just when these events took place? Since it is not about modern times?

Peace>>>AJ:love9:

 

[sanctus]

Based on"history and Bible's historical context", can you kindly tell me just when these events took place? Since it is not about modern times?

Peace>>>AJ:love9:

Find out exactly what the genre of apocalyptic literature actually meant in historical context.That will supply your answer.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Based on"history and Bible's historical context", can you kindly tell me just when these events took place? Since it is not about modern times?

The events took place around the time those documents were composed. For centuries there have been people who believed those apocalyptic passages referred to their own times and the imminent end of the world. They've all been wrong. Doesn't that tell you anything?

 

[look3467]

Find out exactly what the genre of apocalyptic literature actually meant in historical context.That will supply your answer.

Sanctus, I know what I want to believe about it. What I wanted was Dexters answer to that question.

Thank you kindly for yours.

Peace>>>AJ:love9:

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Okay Look, in a little more detail:

The men who wrote the books of Daniel and Revelation were writing about the current events of their time. Daniel, for instance, supposedly is about events during the Babylonian exile, but it contains so many anachronisms about the period of the exile it's impossible to believe it was written at that time. The writer's real purpose was to denounce the Seleucid Empire, which in the 2nd century BCE was fiercely persecuting Judaism, but he couldn't attack the Seleucids directly or he'd have faced charges of treason and rebellion. So he fictionalized it, set the tale in the far past and made Babylon and Nebuchadnezzar proxy villains for Syria and the Seleucids, and used mystic signs and symbols that his readers would have understood but the overlords would not have. The vision of the four beasts described in chapter 7, for example, works out this way:

-the winged lion = the Chaldean Empire
-the bear = the Median Empire
-the Leopard = the Persian Empire
(the leopard's four heads are the four Persian monarchs mentioned later in the book)
-the fourth beast, unnamed but described as uniquely dreadful and terrible and strong, is Alexander the Great's Macedonian Empire. The portion of that which came under the leadership of Alexander's general Seleucus and his descendants is the important part; it's the source of the savage persecution the Jews were suffering at the time the book was written.

Similar explanations apply to Revelation. It too was written during a time of persecution, most likely during Domitian's time as Roman Emperor, around the year 95, and the writer resorted to many of the same dodges the writer of Daniel used, for the same kinds of reasons: deniability to the Roman civil authorities while using signs and symbols from the apocalyptic passages of the Old Testament that his audience--the seven churches of Asia Minor the book is addressed to--would have understood. The famous Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, for instance, are the evils predicted to fall upon the Roman Empire, ensuring its fall and the beginning of the Messianic era.

Beyond that, you can do your own research. A good place to start is Asimov's Guide to the Bible, which is where I got the information in this post. It's long out of print, unfortunately, but you should be able to find it in a library. It's also available from Amazon.com.

 

[El Barto]

I read about the some of symbol isms of the new testaments. Never read about the old. Sounds like an incredible read. It was asked why Alexander the great was never mentioned in the bible , know why now.
But my feeling Dex is that this is a futile effort towards this Look 3467. The insanity will continue but on the other hand will have grasped the interest of the others curious minds

 

[look3467]

I read about the some of symbol isms of the new testaments. Never read about the old. Sounds like an incredible read. It was asked why Alexander the great was never mentioned in the bible , know why now.
But my feeling Dex is that this is a futile effort towards this Look 3467. The insanity will continue but on the other hand will have grasped the interest of the others curious minds

This look?...............Insignificant gnat that I am. Just swat me out!

Hey......... Mr. EL Barto, If I can love who you are, God can too! And He is greater than this little gnat!

Peace>>>AJ:love9:

 

[look3467]

Okay Look, in a little more detail:

The men who wrote the books of Daniel and Revelation were writing about the current events of their time. Daniel, for instance, supposedly is about events during the Babylonian exile, but it contains so many anachronisms about the period of the exile it's impossible to believe it was written at that time. The writer's real purpose was to denounce the Seleucid Empire, which in the 2nd century BCE was fiercely persecuting Judaism, but he couldn't attack the Seleucids directly or he'd have faced charges of treason and rebellion. So he fictionalized it, set the tale in the far past and made Babylon and Nebuchadnezzar proxy villains for Syria and the Seleucids, and used mystic signs and symbols that his readers would have understood but the overlords would not have. The vision of the four beasts described in chapter 7, for example, works out this way:

-the winged lion = the Chaldean Empire
-the bear = the Median Empire
-the Leopard = the Persian Empire
(the leopard's four heads are the four Persian monarchs mentioned later in the book)
-the fourth beast, unnamed but described as uniquely dreadful and terrible and strong, is Alexander the Great's Macedonian Empire. The portion of that which came under the leadership of Alexander's general Seleucus and his descendants is the important part; it's the source of the savage persecution the Jews were suffering at the time the book was written.

Similar explanations apply to Revelation. It too was written during a time of persecution, most likely during Domitian's time as Roman Emperor, around the year 95, and the writer resorted to many of the same dodges the writer of Daniel used, for the same kinds of reasons: deniability to the Roman civil authorities while using signs and symbols from the apocalyptic passages of the Old Testament that his audience--the seven churches of Asia Minor the book is addressed to--would have understood. The famous Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, for instance, are the evils predicted to fall upon the Roman Empire, ensuring its fall and the beginning of the Messianic era.

Beyond that, you can do your own research. A good place to start is Asimov's Guide to the Bible, which is where I got the information in this post. It's long out of print, unfortunately, but you should be able to find it in a library. It's also available from Amazon.com.

Well Dexter, that is rather interesting to say the least.

But because I believe in God, I accept the bible version of it as written in the very first verse: Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

After that, everything else fits perfectly into the picture that God has painted for us.

But, I’ll let that be as it may.
Thanks for your reply.

Peace>>>AJ:love9:

 

[Dexter Sinister]

But because I believe in God, I accept the bible version of it as written in the very first verse: Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

Believing in God doesn't necessarily require you to accept a literal understanding of what the Bible says, that's quite a separate leap of faith. Revelation is so thickly mystical no literal understanding is possible anyway. Interpretations that claim it's about modern times are fully metaphorical in assigning various roles to modern states that didn't exist at the time Revelation was written.

Doesn't the phrase "must shortly come to pass" mean anything to you? No rational person would say that and mean 2000 years later, nor does it make sense that god in communicating with us would say 'shortly' and mean 2000 years later. Presumably he knows how we would understand that word. It's not about modern times, it's about the persecution of early Christians by the Romans and an exhortation to the faithful to stand fast, though it's sharply critical of several of the churches it's addressed to, on the assumption that god's plan will soon work out in their favour. And that's all it's about.

More to the point, and one of the reasons I keep responding to nonsense like this, is the alarming thought that surveys indicate large numbers of people (150 million in the USA alone) believe Jesus will return to judge the living and the dead within the next 50 years. He will appear only after things have gone horribly wrong all over the planet, which means such believers will understand every great disaster as another sign that the most glorious possible event in history is getting closer. Beliefs like that aren't going to help us create a sustainable future for ourselves, and may in fact be self-fulfilling. I'm sure it's no exaggeration to claim that many American Christians, possibly including many powerful people in the current administration, view the U.S. involvement in Iraq with a fatalistic "this is how it begins" kind of attitude, which can only lead them deeper into it and make things worse.

Believing you're doing god's work can be a dangerous and destructive delusion. If the world ends with a nuclear conflagration in the Middle East some time in the next 50 years, it won't be god that does it. It'll be us, led down the path to self-destruction by religious dogma and stupidity.

 

[look3467]

Believing in God doesn't necessarily require you to accept a literal understanding of what the Bible says, that's quite a separate leap of faith. Revelation is so thickly mystical no literal understanding is possible anyway. Interpretations that claim it's about modern times are fully metaphorical in assigning various roles to modern states that didn't exist at the time Revelation was written. >>>Dexter

Thanks again for responding to my nonsense stuff. And to your surprise, you will find I agree with you on the on the “literal” and the “most shortly” words.

But belief in God allows me to understand what the meanings are of those things written.

Most Christians though they mean well, are in effect innocent of that knowledge as I dare say the non-believers as well.

That knowledge if not understood is not held against us. So whether you believe it or not, it is my understanding that you are safe as well as all the rest.

But, of course, that is nonsense anyways.

Doesn't the phrase "must shortly come to pass" mean anything to you? No rational person would say that and mean 2000 years later, nor does it make sense that god in communicating with us would say 'shortly' and mean 2000 years later. Presumably he knows how we would understand that word. It's not about modern times, it's about the persecution of early Christians by the Romans and an exhortation to the faithful to stand fast, though it's sharply critical of several of the churches it's addressed to, on the assumption that god's plan will soon work out in their favour. And that's all it's about.>>>Dexter

Yes, “Most shortly” is key in understanding what the book is all about. Though the words most shortly are there, they are over looked as if they weren’t there.
That is what has been the misunderstanding all these years.

It is I believe a relative few of the many Christians that have actually discovered it and have begun to see things in a different light, such as myself.

The whole book is about God in Jesus re-creating the world back unto Himself.

Why? Because the first creation was marred by death (Separation) the second creation is perfect giving life (Reconciliation) to the marred creature.

That is it in a nut shell sort of speak.

Shortly come to pass is Jesus telling His Apostles at the last supper what things were about to happen to Him, and that the end (End not understood) was about to come for the first creation.

Verse: Isa 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

And that the new creation was going to be ushered in at His resurrection.

More to the point, and one of the reasons I keep responding to nonsense like this, is the alarming thought that surveys indicate large numbers of people (150 million in the USA alone) believe Jesus will return to judge the living and the dead within the next 50 years. He will appear only after things have gone horribly wrong all over the planet, which means such believers will understand every great disaster as another sign that the most glorious possible event in history is getting closer. Beliefs like that aren't going to help us create a sustainable future for ourselves, and may in fact be self-fulfilling. I'm sure it's no exaggeration to claim that many American Christians, possibly including many powerful people in the current administration, view the U.S. involvement in Iraq with a fatalistic "this is how it begins" kind of attitude, which can only lead them deeper into it and make things worse. >>>Dexter

The carrot before the horse will keep the horse moving on track. Many folk will not move if they took hold of the carrot.
Because of mankind’s weakness hope in the carrot is a must in order to keep them motivated.
I’m not making excuses for us, meaning them and I, because I diligently sought after what I now believe.
I don’t need a carrot to keep me going because my love for God is matured.

Believing you're doing god's work can be a dangerous and destructive delusion. If the world ends with a nuclear conflagration in the Middle East some time in the next 50 years, it won't be god that does it. It'll be us, led down the path to self-destruction by religious dogma and stupidity.>>>Dexter

I believe I am a vessel used by God for “good” works, and not for destruction of anything.
If the world wants to destroy itself, than I have no issue with that. I just have to survive the best way I know how without participating in its destruction.

But, if I can enlighten some to see God with their hearts rather than with their minds, they too will be able to live life to the fullest as promised.

But to those who don’t, well then, let the world take care of them.

There is this verse which states: “My people are being destroyed because of the lack of knowledge.”

This is the part where the lack of knowledge giving understanding to the “shortly Come to pass”, is causing the heart ache in Christians with hope of the return of Christ when He has already returned to many, yet not understanding so.

Does that make me unique and different from other Christians; only in my understanding?
But I still hold Christ as my foundation and waver not from that.


Peace>>>AJ:love9: