The Great Whore of the Revelation (chp 18)

[Guest shiloh357]

I must not have explained my self well. What I am trying to say is that when we find a description that fits an existing known entity, Like ancient pagan Rome, it is not wise then to try and apply that same description to something modern and point to the modern city, or entity. We need to understand and accept that the description is about (in this example) Rome. The message will apply to all generations. Keep in mind I am only talking about when we can identify the description to a known entity of their time. Now there are most definitely parts that talk of a future event. I would agree that anything that is about the future, the details become very important. What I find is that people are looking at a description of something that has already occurred and trying to find it in the future (present day). In doing so they have missed the message which was the whole point in the first place. The description of the whore physically fits ancient Rome, it would make sense for the writer to describe it this way, otherwise he would have been killed. The people understood he was describing Rome. Just because he was describing Rome at that time does not mean the same message does not apply today. We have our own Rome. We have our own Whore. But trying to take the physical descriptions of ancient Rome and finding a city, or institution of today that fits it perfectly is fruitless and you end up missing the whole message.

God Bless,

K.D.

Okay, now that makes sense. I see where you are coming from, now.

[Guest shiloh357]

The application of the message then follows from the correct interpretation.

Which you have yet to provide.

[MrsSealedEternal]

That's interesting you should say that.

I recently read a comparison of the understanding of time.

In western cultures (of which we are a part), we think of time is linear.

In eastern cultures (of which the Hebrew people are a part of), time is considered to be circular.

What you are describing sounds like a circular understanding of time.

I will be the first to admit that I could be completely and totally wrong about this. This is what makes the most sense to me. When I look to the fruit of what other interpretations bring I am not reminded of God. I see hatred, division, pride, and arrogance. From the perspective I have submitted I find it calls us to be humble, called to love one another, called to become one voice used by God. and my wife tells me I go in circles all the time

God Bless,

K.D.

Reminds me of a song by Billy Preston, "Will it go round in circles?"

[Massorite]

The application of the message then follows from the correct interpretation.

Which you have yet to provide.

I've given you my evidence; what noone can give is understanding, especially when the evidence is rejected.

Get used to it Rufus. Some people will reject the most solid evidence regardless of how much proof you provide them

[Guest shiloh357]

The application of the message then follows from the correct interpretation.

Which you have yet to provide.

I've given you my evidence; what noone can give is understanding, especially when the evidence is rejected.

I did not say you did not provide evidence. What I said is that you have yet to provide the correct interpretation, nor have provided the correct application. Secondly, your "evidence" as you call it has already been addressed, and it has been demonstrated that your "evidence" as you call it, is not entirely consistent with passage in question.

[Guest shiloh357]

The application of the message then follows from the correct interpretation.

Which you have yet to provide.

I've given you my evidence; what noone can give is understanding, especially when the evidence is rejected.

Get used to it Rufus. Some people will reject the most solid evidence regardless of how much proof you provide them

Oh, I know. I think Sir William Drummond summed it up best: "He that will not reason is a bigot; he that cannot reason is a fool; he that dares not reason is a slave."

"Keep on listening, but do not perceive; keep on looking but do not understand" - Isaiah 6:9

Having the temerity to disagree with you is not failure or refusal to reason. So you can ceaseyour ad hominmem attacks, Ruifus. Calling me a fool, a bigot and aslave (even while using someone else's words to do it ) is an ad hominem attack which you have, in previous posts, claimed to oppose. Obviosly, you seem unable to stick to your own principles, which only underscores the lack of integrity with which I am forced to dialogue. You have nothing to say to me about the Bible, Jesus or Christianity as you are not the person of character you profess to be. You have, for all intents and purposes, lost the debate.

[Guest shiloh357]

QUOTE

Having the temerity to disagree with you is not failure or refusal to reason. So you can ceaseyour ad hominmem attacks, Ruifus. Calling me a fool, a bigot and aslave (even while using someone else's words to do it ) is an ad hominem attack which you have, in previous posts, claimed to oppose. Obviosly, you seem unable to stick to your own principles, which only underscores the lack of integrity with which I am forced to dialogue. You have nothing to say to me about the Bible, Jesus or Christianity as you are not the person of character you profess to be. You have, for all intents and purposes, lost the debate.

...all of which is irrelevant to the issue of how to interpret the image of the whore in chapter 17 of the book of Revelation.

Oh I see. The ad hominem attack was not irrelevant enough for you to post, it's just "irrelevant" when you are held accountable for an ad hominen attack. You jump on others when they do it, but then are unwillng to accountable for it when you engage in it. Your hypocrisy is so thick I could cut it with a knife.

You have crossed a line, Rufus and you have lost the debate with me. You have nothing of any theological value or credibility to say to me. I have no use for an imposter or a fraud.

[Guest shiloh357]

QUOTE

Having the temerity to disagree with you is not failure or refusal to reason. So you can ceaseyour ad hominmem attacks, Ruifus. Calling me a fool, a bigot and aslave (even while using someone else's words to do it ) is an ad hominem attack which you have, in previous posts, claimed to oppose. Obviosly, you seem unable to stick to your own principles, which only underscores the lack of integrity with which I am forced to dialogue. You have nothing to say to me about the Bible, Jesus or Christianity as you are not the person of character you profess to be. You have, for all intents and purposes, lost the debate.

...all of which is irrelevant to the issue of how to interpret the image of the whore in chapter 17 of the book of Revelation.

Oh I see. The ad hominem attack was not irrelevant enough for you to post, it's just "irrelevant" when you are held accountable for an ad hominen attack. You jump on others when they do it, but then are unwillng to accountable for it when you engage in it. Your hypocrisy is so thick I could cut it with a knife.

You have crossed a line, Rufus and you have lost the debate with me. You have nothing of any theological value or credibility to say to me. I have no use for an imposter or a fraud.

...all of which is irrelevant to the issue of how to interpret the image of the whore in chapter 17 of the book of Revelation.

You're right it is not relevant to the subject of the whore of Rev. 17. It is relevant to something much greater. You have sacrificed your integrity and that has greater relevance than anything either one of us could say about the whore. You are not much of a man, and even less of a Christian. When you decide to beome a real Christian, then I will egage you on the topic of the whore. Until then, I will not suffer a fraud. This will be my last post to you until you get saved and find Christ.

[Massorite]

Having the temerity to disagree with you is not failure or refusal to reason. So you can ceaseyour ad hominmem attacks, Ruifus. Calling me a fool, a bigot and aslave (even while using someone else's words to do it ) is an ad hominem attack which you have, in previous posts, claimed to oppose. Obviosly, you seem unable to stick to your own principles, which only underscores the lack of integrity with which I am forced to dialogue. You have nothing to say to me about the Bible, Jesus or Christianity as you are not the person of character you profess to be. You have, for all intents and purposes, lost the debate.

...all of which is irrelevant to the issue of how to interpret the image of the whore in chapter 17 of the book of Revelation. I maintain that John used an image from Jewish prophetic literature with which his readers would have been familiar and that his word to them was one of encouragement during the dark days of Roman persecution.

You are correct about the symbolism John used. The only thing that John had to discribe what he saw were the thing that were in existance in his day.

I believe that for us the book of Revelation is a book for the past, present, and the future and that some of what he wrote can be applied to both the past and the future.

You Go Boy!