• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Debunked Revelations?

40% of her argument is "this is how it feels to me". 40% of her argument is bad history. and 20% of it is stuff everyone already knows. :shrug:
 
cpwill said:
40% of her argument is "this is how it feels to me". 40% of her argument is bad history. and 20% of it is stuff everyone already knows. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Can you elaborate?
 
There has long been debate over various aspects of Revelations, most especially whether it refers chiefly/entirely to the events of AD70 or to end-times prophesy.


I reserve judgement, but Revelations isn't the only end-times prophecy in the Bible and I tend to think there will be an "end" someday.
 
Goshin said:
There has long been debate over various aspects of Revelations, most especially whether it refers chiefly/entirely to the events of AD70 or to end-times prophesy.


I reserve judgement, but Revelations isn't the only end-times prophecy in the Bible and I tend to think there will be an "end" someday.
Click to expand...

I think there will be too.

I think it's called the heat death of the universe.
 
Quantrill said:
I don't see where anyone proved the revelation given in the Book of Revelation is a myth. Its only the unbeliever saying anything believed by the Christian concerning Revelation is not true. And that is supposed to 'debunk'. Please.

Quantrill
Click to expand...

So what proves it's true? Is it true because Christian people believe it and tell non-believers that 'this is the truth?'

That's really all religious debate is: Believers believing - though they never tend to agree with eachother - based on their faith. And non-believers disbelieving. And they get together and discuss or argue - and both leave thinking the other's a ****ing moron for their views.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
So what proves it's true? Is it true because Christian people believe it and tell non-believers that 'this is the truth?'

That's really all religious debate is: Believers believing - though they never tend to agree with eachother - based on their faith. And non-believers disbelieving. And they get together and discuss or argue - and both leave thinking the other's a ****ing moron for their views.
Click to expand...

Nothing proves it is true to the unbeliever. And the believer is not trying to prove to you it is true. The believer, Christian, knows it is true, as is all of the Bible. And the truth of it will be seen in the future when it occurs. But, that doesn't mean the unbeliever will believe it. The unbeliever must always have a different take on the Bible as the believer. Not because he is a moron. Because he doesn't see.

Quantrill
 
Last edited:
Quantrill said:
Nothing proves it is true to the unbeliever. And the believer is not trying to prove to you it is true. The believer, Christian, knows it is true, as is all of the Bible. And the truth of it will be seen in the future when it occurs. But, that doesn't mean the unbeliever will believe it. The unbeliever must always have a different take on the Bible as the believer. Not because he is a moron. Because he doesn't see.

Quantrill
Click to expand...
and that's where we can truly,... forgive.they can't help it.then... we can love again.
 
The very existence of the prophecy renders it false. It details a very specific scheme by the villains of the story, and exactly how and why it will fail. The devil is presumably literate, and well aware of the prophecy detailing his eventual downfall. According to the story, he's already lost once. Why would he not do something radically different, since that way he might actually win? But then again, the very basic argument of the western god is that his will cannot actually be thwarted, and as we've already mentioned, Lucifer's rebellion did not succeed. If one of the underlying facts of the universe is that god cannot lose, why fight at all? And if the devil has no choice in the matter, can we really still call him a bad guy?

If the exact nature of the final battle against the devil is written out, the only two ways that it could come to pass are if the devil is unimaginably stupid, or is compelled to follow it anyway. And especially since it's a pretty one sided conflict. The devil doesn't destroy the world in the story. Jesus does, largely as punishment for people embracing a secular utopia. The Battle of Armageddon and everything leading up to it are guaranteed to fail. Assuming the devil has any choice whatsoever, the act of writing it down guarantees that it won't transpire as written.
 
Paschendale said:
The very existence of the prophecy renders it false. It details a very specific scheme by the villains of the story, and exactly how and why it will fail. The devil is presumably literate, and well aware of the prophecy detailing his eventual downfall. According to the story, he's already lost once. Why would he not do something radically different, since that way he might actually win? But then again, the very basic argument of the western god is that his will cannot actually be thwarted, and as we've already mentioned, Lucifer's rebellion did not succeed. If one of the underlying facts of the universe is that god cannot lose, why fight at all? And if the devil has no choice in the matter, can we really still call him a bad guy?

If the exact nature of the final battle against the devil is written out, the only two ways that it could come to pass are if the devil is unimaginably stupid, or is compelled to follow it anyway. And especially since it's a pretty one sided conflict. The devil doesn't destroy the world in the story. Jesus does, largely as punishment for people embracing a secular utopia. The Battle of Armageddon and everything leading up to it are guaranteed to fail. Assuming the devil has any choice whatsoever, the act of writing it down guarantees that it won't transpire as written.
Click to expand...

So you're a prophet now.
 
I will take some exception to the oft repeated assertion that early competing books were "suppressed" by the Church because they didn't "fit their agenda". Greek Gnostics in particular were making assertions that were in contrast to the basic notions of the nature of Christ that Paul was teaching, prompting St. Irenaeus to write one of the key works of Christian tradition, Against Heresies. It is these damning works of thought and reason, not reactionary protectionism, that doomed non-dogmatic works in the early Church.
 
Quantrill said:
Nothing proves it is true to the unbeliever. And the believer is not trying to prove to you it is true. The believer, Christian, knows it is true, as is all of the Bible. And the truth of it will be seen in the future when it occurs. But, that doesn't mean the unbeliever will believe it. The unbeliever must always have a different take on the Bible as the believer. Not because he is a moron. Because he doesn't see.

Quantrill
Click to expand...


Apropos of not being able to see...or hear or understand.

Gospel of Mary said:
24) He who has ears to hear, let him hear.
25) Peter said to him, Since you have explained everything to us, tell us this also: What is the sin of the world?
26) The Savior said There is no sin, but it is you who make sin when you do the things that are like the nature of adultery, which is called sin.
27) That is why the Good came into your midst, to the essence of every nature in order to restore it to its root.
28) Then He continued and said, That is why you become sick and die, for you are deprived of the one who can heal you.
29) He who has a mind to understand, let him understand.
Click to expand...
 
Paschendale said:
The very existence of the prophecy renders it false. It details a very specific scheme by the villains of the story, and exactly how and why it will fail. The devil is presumably literate, and well aware of the prophecy detailing his eventual downfall. According to the story, he's already lost once. Why would he not do something radically different, since that way he might actually win? But then again, the very basic argument of the western god is that his will cannot actually be thwarted, and as we've already mentioned, Lucifer's rebellion did not succeed. If one of the underlying facts of the universe is that god cannot lose, why fight at all? And if the devil has no choice in the matter, can we really still call him a bad guy?

If the exact nature of the final battle against the devil is written out, the only two ways that it could come to pass are if the devil is unimaginably stupid, or is compelled to follow it anyway. And especially since it's a pretty one sided conflict. The devil doesn't destroy the world in the story. Jesus does, largely as punishment for people embracing a secular utopia. The Battle of Armageddon and everything leading up to it are guaranteed to fail. Assuming the devil has any choice whatsoever, the act of writing it down guarantees that it won't transpire as written.
Click to expand...

The prophecy of Revelation will not fail. It will occur exactly as written. The act of revealing it and having it written down gives the Christian the assurance that God is in complete control. As does all of prophecy and the Scriptures.

Quantrill
 
Aunt Spiker said:
So what proves it's true? Is it true because Christian people believe it and tell non-believers that 'this is the truth?'

That's really all religious debate is: Believers believing - though they never tend to agree with eachother - based on their faith. And non-believers disbelieving. And they get together and discuss or argue - and both leave thinking the other's a ****ing moron for their views.
Click to expand...

I agree, what a bunch of ****ing morons.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Appears I must remind everyone that we require a high level of civility in the Religious Discussion forum, due to the volatility of the subject. Please bear this in mind.
 
Quantrill said:
The prophecy of Revelation will not fail. It will occur exactly as written. The act of revealing it and having it written down gives the Christian the assurance that God is in complete control. As does all of prophecy and the Scriptures.
Click to expand...

Doesn't that negate free will, then?
 
Paschendale said:
Doesn't that negate free will, then?
Click to expand...
There is no time in God's universe.there can be only one outcome.we,our created universe are just catching up.it's like when u play a computer game and speed up time to 2x,4x etc.u waiting for the game to catch up but the carachters still go thru all the motions.
 
If the Revelation is the truth or false cannot be proven. Either you believe it, or you don't. As it's a matter of belief, not of knowledge in the scientific sense, it is useless when one side bashes the other about it.

That said, assuming the Revelation indeed describes future events (or events which were still in the future when it was written, but have taken place since then), it's still very difficult to interpret it, because the language used is very symbolic, full of metaphors that can be interpreted in many different ways.

Take the example of the "sign of the Antichrist" (is the Antichrist even literally mentioned in Revelation? I think not), the mark on forehead and hand for people who want to trade -- modern interpretations see a connection to modern technology, such as virtual money transfer, chip cards and so on. Traditional interpretations took "forehead" as symbol for the mind and "hand" as symbol for the deeds -- only people who have the right spirit and do the right thing are allowed to trade. And that's just one example, there are many more.

So criticizing a particular interpretation of the very vague and symbolic scripture is not necessarily the same as claiming the scripture is wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom