lord voldemort wrote:

He says there is no connection between Israel and the Ottoman Empire. Well here is another coincide with the bible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Megiddo_%281918%29

England and the Ottoman Empire battle in Megiddo (Armageddon), months before the Empire surrenders.

Just one more connection between the Ottoman Empire and the bible.

No, the Great Day of God Almighty has not yet come.. the day in which he Himself fights against the collected armies of the world. Armageddon

There have been many battles around Megiddo.. but htis one is described in scripture quite clearly. For one thing the blood from the slaughter will rise up the height of a horses neck. That has not happened.

The ottoman emprie woudl have been utterly destroyed at that battle.. That did not happen.

The Ottoman empire is not " the kings of the East". It was a western empire.

Nor have any of the Bowls of GOd's wrath been poured out upon humanity yet...

Once every living thing in the oceans die and the mountains can no longer be found.. and hailstones of 100 pounds each fall upon us.. then we know that Armaegadoon is nigh.


12The sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up to prepare the way for the kings from the East. 13Then I saw three evil[a] spirits that looked like frogs; they came out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet. 14They are spirits of demons performing miraculous signs, and they go out to the kings of the whole world, to gather them for the battle on the great day of God Almighty.

15"Behold, I come like a thief! Blessed is he who stays awake and keeps his clothes with him, so that he may not go naked and be shamefully exposed."

16Then they gathered the kings together to the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon.

1Then I heard a loud voice from the temple saying to the seven angels, "Go, pour out the seven bowls of God's wrath on the earth." 2The first angel went and poured out his bowl on the land, and ugly and painful sores broke out on the people who had the mark of the beast and worshiped his image.

3The second angel poured out his bowl on the sea, and it turned into blood like that of a dead man, and every living thing in the sea died.

4The third angel poured out his bowl on the rivers and springs of water, and they became blood. 5Then I heard the angel in charge of the waters say:
"You are just in these judgments,
you who are and who were, the Holy One,
because you have so judged;
6for they have shed the blood of your saints and prophets,
and you have given them blood to drink as they deserve."

7And I heard the altar respond:
"Yes, Lord God Almighty,
true and just are your judgments."

8The fourth angel poured out his bowl on the sun, and the sun was given power to scorch people with fire. 9They were seared by the intense heat and they cursed the name of God, who had control over these plagues, but they refused to repent and glorify him.

10The fifth angel poured out his bowl on the throne of the beast, and his kingdom was plunged into darkness. Men gnawed their tongues in agony 11and cursed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, but they refused to repent of what they had done.

12The sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up to prepare the way for the kings from the East. 13Then I saw three evil[a] spirits that looked like frogs; they came out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet. 14They are spirits of demons performing miraculous signs, and they go out to the kings of the whole world, to gather them for the battle on the great day of God Almighty.

15"Behold, I come like a thief! Blessed is he who stays awake and keeps his clothes with him, so that he may not go naked and be shamefully exposed."

16Then they gathered the kings together to the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon.

17The seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air, and out of the temple came a loud voice from the throne, saying, "It is done!" 18Then there came flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder and a severe earthquake. No earthquake like it has ever occurred since man has been on earth, so tremendous was the quake. 19The great city split into three parts, and the cities of the nations collapsed. God remembered Babylon the Great and gave her the cup filled with the wine of the fury of his wrath. 20Every island fled away and the mountains could not be found. 21From the sky huge hailstones of about a hundred pounds each fell upon men. And they cursed God on account of the plague of hail, because the plague was so terrible.



Nor has the River Euphrates yet dried up.. in all of written history.

12The sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up to prepare the way for the kings from the East. 13Then I saw three evil[a] spirits that looked like frogs; they came out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet. 14They are spirits of demons performing miraculous signs, and they go out to the kings of the whole world, to gather them for the battle on the great day of God Almighty.

15"Behold, I come like a thief! Blessed is he who stays awake and keeps his clothes with him, so that he may not go naked and be shamefully exposed."

16Then they gathered the kings together to the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon.

againsttheantichrist wrote:

Megiddo is the location of the most battles in world history, so that doesn't really surprise me all that much.

No, but is it just one more event, to tie the pieces together.

This was one of the last battles that defeated the Ottoman Empire, which led to the formation of Israel as a nation, via the Balfour Accords.

There have been only three recorded battles at Megiddo in history:

This was the third one.

second one was 609 B.C.E. Judah and Egypt fought

The First one was between Ancient Egyptian forces under the pharaoh Thutmose III and a large Canaanite coalition in the 15th C.

So, this site for battle as been very limited.

Quote :

There have been many battles around Megiddo.. but htis one is described in scripture quite clearly. For one thing the blood from the slaughter will rise up the height of a horses neck. That has not happened.

That is hyperbole. For that to happen, the deaths would need to be in the trillions. Not possible.

There have been only three battles. Not many.

Quote :

The ottoman emprie woudl have been utterly destroyed at that battle.. That did not happen.

It was the last battle, one month later the empire surrendered.

Quote :

The Ottoman empire is not " the kings of the East". It was a western empire.

There were Islamic, that makes them eastern. Nice try.

Quote :

Nor have any of the Bowls of GOd's wrath been poured out upon humanity yet...

Once every living thing in the oceans die and the mountains can no longer be found.. and hailstones of 100 pounds each fall upon us.. then we know that Armaegadoon is nigh.

For someone who denies taking this book literally, you takes this very literally.

The battle of the Ottoman Armageddon was made up of many nations fighting each other, in a world war.

I asked you if you are a literalist on the book, you said no. Now you are making claims that this book is literal. Which is it?

Revelation is a book of symbolism and poetry. You will never see 100 pounds rocks from the sky, nor will you see blood to the height of horses reigns, it is all symbolism, poetry and hyperbole.

The judgments are also symbolic.

Why don't you take the stand that there is a literal Red Dragon flying through the air and that we will actually see a beast rise from the Sea? You are taking everything as literal, so why not take those to be literal?

lord voldemort wrote:

Quote :

There have been many battles around Megiddo.. but htis one is described in scripture quite clearly. For one thing the blood from the slaughter will rise up the height of a horses neck. That has not happened.

That is hyperbole. For that to happen, the deaths would need to be in the trillions. Not possible.

There have been only three battles. Not many.

Quote :

The ottoman emprie woudl have been utterly destroyed at that battle.. That did not happen.

It was the last battle, one month later the empire surrendered.

Quote :

The Ottoman empire is not " the kings of the East". It was a western empire.

There were Islamic, that makes them eastern. Nice try.

Quote :

Nor have any of the Bowls of GOd's wrath been poured out upon humanity yet...

Once every living thing in the oceans die and the mountains can no longer be found.. and hailstones of 100 pounds each fall upon us.. then we know that Armaegadoon is nigh.

For someone who denies taking this book literally, you takes this very literally.

The battle of the Ottoman Armageddon was made up of many nations fighting each other, in a world war.

I asked you if you are a literalist on the book, you said no. Now you are making claims that this book is literal. Which is it?

Revelation is a book of symbolism and poetry. You will never see 100 pounds rocks from the sky, nor will you see blood to the height of horses reigns, it is all symbolism, poetry and hyperbole.

The judgments are also symbolic.

Why don't you take the stand that there is a literal Red Dragon flying through the air and that we will actually see a beast rise from the Sea? You are taking everything as literal, so why not take those to be literal?

Some things are literal and some things are not, regardless of whether they are viewd as "symbolic" or not. It does not have to be one way or the other, Lord V. Symbols can be both concrete and allegorical.

In this same sense. Beasts can refer to an Age ( or Empire, a you prefer).. but also in the same book can refer to an entity and/or person. The Contesxt of each usage must be oberved.

As I said, symbolism can be literal or allegorical. A symbol can refer to something very concrete and literal or to something allegorical.

Modern American political language is a perfet example of this.

In a single sentence we here politicians and pundits use symbolism both to address something concrete and something allegorical as well. Language is never robotic in regards to abstract or specific, Lord V. Such it is also not so in scripture.

Quote :

No, but is it just one more event, to tie the pieces together.

This was one of the last battles that defeated the Ottoman Empire, which led to the formation of Israel as a nation, via the Balfour Accords.

There have been only three recorded battles at Megiddo in history:

This was the third one.

second one was 609 B.C.E. Judah and Egypt fought

The First one was between Ancient Egyptian forces under the pharaoh Thutmose III and a large Canaanite coalition in the 15th C.

So, this site for battle as been very limited.

ACcording to scripture, The Battle of Armageddon is the final battle on earth. The fact the we are still ahving battles at all.. means that it has not occured yet.


It is known as Ragnarok in Nordic mythology and same is true for it. It is the final battle in midgard. There are no battles after it.

The final battle, no afraid not.

Read Chap 20, the Great Red Dragon leads people to the plain outside of Jerusalem to battle the Jews and God destroys them. That dragon is the Beast from the Abyss.

I am glad to see you are in a more reasonable mood. Now we can discuss differences.

The battle of Armageddon Ottoman Empire, ended the war between the allies and the Ottoman Turks, 1918. One month later, they withdrew from the war. Leading to the treaty of Treaty of Sèvres

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_S%C3%A8vres

Ending the Ottoman Empire.

Quote :

Some things are literal and some things are not, regardless of whether they are viewd as "symbolic" or not. It does not have to be one way or the other, Lord V. Symbols can be both concrete and allegorical.

In this same sense. Beasts can refer to an Age ( or Empire, a you prefer).. but also in the same book can refer to an entity and/or person. The Contesxt of each usage must be oberved.

As I said, symbolism can be literal or allegorical. A symbol can refer to something very concrete and literal or to something allegorical.

Yes, somethings are. But Revelation can not be looked at in the same way as the Letters of Paul.

To understand the way I see is is Symbolic-literalism. What that means is that everything is symbolic, and the meaning is literal.

Beast is kingdom. Understanding what the beast is, lets you understand what the kingdom is, thus why I conclude it is the Ottoman Empire.

Why the sea represents the Beast of rev. 13, because it comes from the sea.
Why the earth is the False Prophet, because it comes from the earth
Why the sun, moon and stars represents the Dragon, because it is symbolizes as the stars revelation 12.

The reason I see it as the Ottoman Empire as the Beast and that rev. 19 is talking about it, one because rev. 19 is the beast and false prophet. Also because there is a another beast that follows it.

The Beast from the Abyss, Rev. 9,11,17,18,20. That is the final empire, not the beast and false prophet.

The problem I have Ash with literalism first, which, like it or not, most start with that. I think that is your assumption, literal first, unless proven otherwise. I base that by your choices of verses, you want them all taken literal, you want the word "His" to be taken as the primary, therefore, the Beast is a person, not an empire. You want the Euphrates River to dry up in the literal sense. You want to see blood rise up to the horses reign, again literal.

You take it literal first, unless it is symbolic because it can not be taken literal. I view that to be the wrong approach. Because the book does not take that approach and it is a misunderstanding of the book itself.

Which is why you are having problems with how I come to my conclusion, because literally, I am on the other side of the board. I take it symbolically, unless literalism can be proven.

Does this clarify my position on this, so you can understand where i am coming from? If not, state what needs to be clarified.

Wait a minute?!?!?!

Ash is using red in his posts?!?!?!?

Has he been taken over by Luke Easter?!?!

Quote :

Which is why you are having problems with how I come to my conclusion, because literally, I am on the other side of the board. I take it symbolically, unless literalism can be proven.

I have no problem with the fact that you take practically everything etherially and symbolically. The Problem I have is that your correlations are not drawn with specific scriptural support, but instead with extrememly vague and incongruous analogies.

Decrypting prophecy requires precision, and your correlations lack precision at every point.

Kamerad Ash wrote:

Quote :

Which is why you are having problems with how I come to my conclusion, because literally, I am on the other side of the board. I take it symbolically, unless literalism can be proven.

I have no problem with the fact that you take practically everything etherially and symbolically. The Problem I have is that your correlations are not drawn with specific scriptural support, but instead with extrememly vague and incongruous analogies.

Decrypting prophecy requires precision, and your correlations lack precision at every point.

You do not have a problem? Have you read your responses to my views? I think that is an understatement.

They are not drawn from specific scriptural support? Again, have you read what I said, yes you did, you freaked out over it. I used specific verses, I showed traditional view, than I showed mine. The only difference is, my view is more distant into the past, than some vague future that may not come to pass.

Since you seem to be pointing to a future that may or maynot exist, than your view is really lacking historical support and your view based on that is entirely vague and incongruous view on the future, which is by itself vague.

Vague and incongruous analogies? I used historical support for everything. They are far from vague, they are specific.

i think they are dead on and he has made a great effort to fit ALL pieces together without leaving ANYTHING out. i honestly dont get why your bashing his theory.

wizardovmetal wrote:

i think they are dead on and he has made a great effort to fit ALL pieces together without leaving ANYTHING out. i honestly dont get why your bashing his theory.

I would not say All, but "many" would be a better word. All means there is nothing left out. I do not want to have that high of a standard put toward my view. But many of the pieces fit better than most traditional stances.

The reason I want a lower standard is it lessens the amount of standard I have to put up to defend my view. This is not saying, I think there is a better view out there, it just means I do not have to put a more stronger case up, than what I have already stated. Ash would have me defend every little thing and than he still claims I fail some standard. He is an extreme.

A reasonable person will see that what I have stated is a good case, at the very minimum I reached the level of "beyond a reasonable doubt". I think my presentation reaches a higher standard of just beyond a reasonable doubt.


The problem with Ashes view, even though he has denied it, his words here state otherwise, he is a hyper-literalist when it comes to the book of revelation. Though he claims he believes in symbolism, his claims support otherwise (that is he has not shown any example of symbolism).

He claims that Revelation 13 beast is a person based off the personal pronouns within the chapter, thus ignoring any symbolism of the word Beast, his assumption it is a man.

He claims that there will be literal stones thrown to the ground from the sky.

He claims that literal blood will run up to the bridles of the horse (which mathematically is impossible for that amount of blood to exist in that place). This is from Revelation 14:

A "thousand and six hundred furlongs" (14:20) is the distance in which the blood will flow "unto the horse bridles" (14:20). A furlong, according to "Easton's Bible Dictionary" (1897), is "a stadium, a Greek measure of distance equal to 606 feet and 9 inches [or, 606.75 feet]". 1,600 furlongs would then be the equivalent of 183.86 miles. source

That would be 589,021,250.4 squared feet, that is not including height of the bridal, which can be as high as five feet, which would bring the number up to: 2,945,106,252 sq. feet of blood. So if one takes this literal, they are clearly not thinking this through.

Even if that number is off by 10 or 20% that still leaves a number that is impossible to meet.

Those that take Revelation and most prophecy to be future, do so because they have been taught and told that is the only way it can be taken, so any attempt to put it in the past to them is "taking the bible and destroying it", look at his comments toward me. His view is incapable of taking it to mean past tense, it all must be future and it must be literal.

This is the problem of dispensationalism, they have to have everything in the future in order for their system to work. I do not need that justification, I need to show past events that line up with the bible to make my point, they can not even do that. Because their view is in the future. They rely on speculation and guess work.

They need a future temple, they need Israel to be a nation, they need a seven year treaty, ect. Historically they already had a seven year treaty with the Palestinians, called the Oslo Accords, which lasted from 1993 to 2000, and in 1996 (about half way point) it was broken by Hamas and then again in 2000 broken by Hamas. No new treaty has been written and agreed upon, there has been talks and arrangements.

They need a man to come up and create a world empire, and make peace and create a peace treaty and enter into the temple and desecrate it.

I do not need to rely on such assumptions and assertions, the only one I need to rely on is that there will be a future empire. That is one point. I do not need all this other stuff to come about to validate my theory.

As I have told you, if they do come about it, it is prophetically irrelevant. If a world government happens, it happens because it has happened before, the Nephilim in Gen. 6 and the Tower of Babel.

But for one man to militarily or even politically take over the entire world and 150+ countries, is impossible, both financially and politically. There will always be someone somewhere who will oppose it, violently.

If it is not America, it will be the Muslims, if it is not the Muslims it will be Indians. If it is not the Indians it will be China. I can throw a stone at any nation and they will oppose being controlled by an outside force. Europe collectively supports it, so there will be no problem, place that same control over another non-European country and they will shake it off violently.

my point was unlike so many prophecy experts who leave out the realitys of mat 25 and tottaly ignore the fact the judgment was specific on jerusalem you seem to keep that as a reality, not to mention the guys who seem to think the beast is a man and the anti-christ is a man as well. alot of experts are stuck on america and think revelations hasnt begun yet.

I agree. They get to fixated on a few points.

you are very good at putting all the concepts on the table and fitting them together rather then taking verses out of context. was what i meant

I am glad I was able to help you with this. Have you looked at my Daniel thread?

no, ill do that though

Quote :

The problem with Ashes view, even though he has denied it, his words here state otherwise, he is a hyper-literalist when it comes to the book of revelation. Though he claims he believes in symbolism, his claims support otherwise (that is he has not shown any example of symbolism).

Yes, some things can be taken more literally than others. The context declares them literal. Something you repeatedly ignore.

Instead of working rom scripture.. to conclusions. You decide on conslusions and then figure out how to make scripture fit your conslusions.


Alos, the rest of your post you purport ot know what I think when it comes to revelations. You are waay off. I know this may be hard for you to understand , lord V. but you are not all knowing, and you do not know my thoughts nopr my views. I'd appreciate that you respon to what I clearly write.. nto what you write for me.. followed by responses to " your writings of my writing.... LOL.

Kamerad Ash wrote:

Instead of working rom scripture.. to conclusions. You decide on conslusions and then figure out how to make scripture fit your conslusions.

Go back a little farther in this thread. This is addressed.

Quote :

Yes, some things can be taken more literally than others. The context declares them literal. Something you repeatedly ignore.

Says you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocalyptic_literature

The state of what Revelation is written as would disagree with you.

http://sites.silaspartners.com/partner/Article_Display_Page/0,,PTID34418_CHID137699_CIID2304042,00.html

How does Apocalyptic Literature Work?



Apocalyptic literature is written in symbolism, poetry, and imageries, as well as in an Old Testament prophecy style (Matt. 24-25; Mark 13; Luke 21; Rev. 1:2-4; 19:9; 22:7-19), all woven as a tapestry to describe literal events but with a twist, using language with symbols that are cataclysmic, words that are exaggerated, and metaphors that may be lost to a 21st century person. Such imagery is often used for God’s judgments and the end of days. These forms of language (genre) are often combinations of narrative (story form) and prose (poetic) written in vivid imagery and rhythmical phrases that are intended to express a deeper but not necessarily a hidden meaning that a “regular” word would not convey. Take our English word, “bull.” It normally means a male cow, but in context, it refers to not just a farm animal, but also could mean someone who is aggressive, an upswing in the stock market, someone who is clumsy, or slang for someone who is telling a lie. This simple word can be exaggerated for a purpose just as Daniel and most of Revelation uses language to express a point. Apocalyptic writing is also found in Isaiah, Ezekiel, Zechariah, and Matthew 24.



Apocalyptic literature is a combination of narrative and prose written in vivid imagery and poetic phrases that are intended to exaggerate for a purpose, such as in Daniel and most of Revelation. Apocalyptic writing is a more specific form of prophecy. Apocalyptic writing is a type of literature that warns us of future events, but the full meaning is hidden to us for the time being. Apocalyptic writing is almost a “secret,” giving us glimpses of what is to come through the use of symbols and imagery. We may not know the meanings now, but time will flush them out.



Metaphors are very evident in apocalyptic writing, which is also more than a specific form of prophecy. Apocalyptic writing is a type of literature that uses vivid symbolism at the same time, it encourages and reassures the reader that God is in control and they do not need to fear as long as they fear Him. Apocalyptic writing is almost a “secret,” giving us glimpses of what is to come through the use of symbols and imagery. It is secret only because when we read it in English (or any language that is not 1st century Greek) nearly 2,000 years later, we do not understand it. Will someone 2,000 years from now realize that a “bull market” does not mean that a farmer’s truck broke down and a cow got loose in a store? Or, when Jesus says He is the bread of life (John 6:35) does that mean we only find Him in a bakery? Does it mean Jesus is a door, a light, a rock, hears sheep, or that He went to every city, or the Lord’s Supper is cannibalism (Matt. 5:14; 9:35, Luke 22:19; John 10:9, 11)? We may not always know the meanings now, but time will flush them out; we can know a lot more if we just take some time to research it. The key to unlocking the code of Revelation is simple; just ask, what did it mean to a first-century Jew?

http://catholic-resources.org/Bible/Apoc_Def.htm

# In biblical terminology, an "apocalypse" is not an event, but a "revelation" that is recorded in written form:

* it is a piece of crisis literature that "reveals" truths about the past, present, and/or future in highly symbolic terms;
* the revelation often comes in dreams or visions, and usually needs to be interpreted with the help of an angel;
* it is usually intended to provide hope and encouragement for people in the midst of severe trials and tribulations.

They would disagree with you.

Quote :

Instead of working rom scripture.. to conclusions. You decide on conslusions and then figure out how to make scripture fit your conslusions.

I read the history of the Ottoman first, then read revelation into, man you got me. What a relief that somebody found me out, this was such a burden to carry. I am glad you were here Ash, you just know what this burden did to me, and you were so full of love to expose it, what can I do to repay you for this.

Quote :

Alos, the rest of your post you purport ot know what I think when it comes to revelations. You are waay off. I know this may be hard for you to understand , lord V. but you are not all knowing, and you do not know my thoughts nopr my views. I'd appreciate that you respon to what I clearly write.. nto what you write for me.. followed by responses to " your writings of my writing.... LOL.

Just as soon as the pot stops calling the kettle black.

lord voldemort wrote:

Quote :

Alos, the rest of your post you purport ot know what I think when it comes to revelations. You are waay off. I know this may be hard for you to understand , lord V. but you are not all knowing, and you do not know my thoughts nopr my views. I'd appreciate that you respon to what I clearly write.. nto what you write for me.. followed by responses to " your writings of my writing.... LOL.

Just as soon as the pot stops calling the kettle black.

Just as soon.? So you admit you are doing it? Well, at least that's a start. Good job.

Kamerad Ash wrote:

lord voldemort wrote:

Quote :

Alos, the rest of your post you purport ot know what I think when it comes to revelations. You are waay off. I know this may be hard for you to understand , lord V. but you are not all knowing, and you do not know my thoughts nopr my views. I'd appreciate that you respon to what I clearly write.. nto what you write for me.. followed by responses to " your writings of my writing.... LOL.

Just as soon as the pot stops calling the kettle black.

Just as soon.? So you admit you are doing it? Well, at least that's a start. Good job.

Your picking for a fight. Not going to happen.