The Wild Beast has both a Name & Number. Do you know what the NAME is?

by Schizm 368 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Jeffro
    Jeffro

    Schizm (to AuldSoul):

    You're so FULL of it! ... Posting your BULL ... nothing more than your way of CRAPping so as not to explode ... Did losing out as a JW actually have that drastic effect on you?
    Little Auldie [3 times]

    another stupid question of yours that doesn't even deserve an answer. [It was a valid question]

    you opened your mouth again and another lie came out. [something that 'seems to be' to AuldSoul cannot validly be called a lie.]
    you're about the biggest bullshitter that I've ever come across ... I really think that you could with the grand prize, the "Biggest BullShitter" award.
    that's just some more of the stinky Stuff that'll get you that award that I mentioned.

    addressing your bullshit.

    forgive me if from this point forward you don't get the attention you crave.

    A tirade of insults against AuldSoul. Are you really trying? Romans 12:18. If you have something valid to say about people's argumentation, then say it, but this resorting to insults that you think others deserve (though you criticize AuldSoul for insulting who he thinks is 'deserving') is pathetic and inappropriate. You claimed earlier that you insult in reaction to provocation, but it appears that the most provocative insults have been coming from you.

  • Jeffro
    Jeffro

    A comparison of Revelation chapter 18 verses 1-3, 8-9, and 21-24 indicates that "Babylon the Great" and "Babylon the great city" are synonymous.

  • LittleToe
    LittleToe

    Jeffro:
    He's not listening. The lights are on but no-one's at home. He's so busy with his wannabe-Elder head stuck up his @ss that he can't see the city for the G/g-reat pile of poo-poo that he's wading through

    He doesn't want to discuss stuff, he wants to teach others and get a following, only this pied piper is trying to attract people back to the WTS with vinegar instead of honey. Fortunately he well typifies the kind of love to be found on the inside of his chosen harlot...

    Schizm:
    The persona that you present on this site isn't particularly likeable. You seem to revel in causing accrimony. Fortunately your dislikability doesn't preclude us loving you. I, for one, genuinely wish you would reform, though I confess that it's as likely as the harlot that gives suck to you doing so.

    The harlot bears the titles, which are a mystery in and of their own right. The beast is being ridden, not necessarily worshipped, by the harlot. As for your attempt to use capital letters as an argument, it's a red-herrring as they aren't used in that manner in the Greek (though you confess that you don't know Greek, so maybe this elluded you). It's simply a title qualifying the Babylon being spoken of.

    Rev.13:

    • v1 - the beast is introduced as coming out of the sea
    • v4 - people worship the beast and it's creator the dragon
    • v11 - second beast, false lamb out of the earth, that encourages worship of the first beast
    • v14 - second beast encourages people to make an image of the first beast and worship
    • v16 - second beast gives people the mark of the first beast
    • v17 - to buy or sell the mark or name or number of the beast is required
    • v18 - the number of the beast is revealed as the number of a man

    Rev.14:

    • v8 - angel declares that Babylon has fallen, the great city and fornicatrix
    • v9-11 - those who worship the beast and have it's mark will be tormented forever

    Rev. 17:

    • v1 - the whore that sits on many waters
    • v2 - fornicatrix of kings
    • v3 - john is shown her, sitting on a beast
    • v5 - a name and mystery is revealed that is written in her forehead
    • v7 - the mystery is to be revealed by the following explanation
    • v14 - the beast has ten horns that represent kings that will war with the lamb
    • v15 - the waters that she sits upon are people
    • v16 - the ten horns hate the whore and turn on her, burning her
    • v17 - the horns give their power to the beast
    • v18 - the woman is the great city

    Rev.18:

    • v2, 3 - Babylon the G/great - fornicatrix of kings, beguiler of merchants.
    • v4 - come out of her - hence it is shown that she represents a group, society, organisation, or real city
    • v9, 10 - she is bewailed by kings, as a city, in the midst of her burning
    • v15 - she is bewailed of merchants, who call her "the great city"
    • v18, 19 - she is bewailed of sailors, as a burning city
    • v20, 21 - the heavens are to delight in the casting down of this city

    Rev.19:

    • v19 - the beast and the kings are gathered to make war
    • v20 - the beast and the prophet (second beast) are cast alive into fire

    As an interlude, later we find in Rev.21:1-3, 10 that there are a new heavens and a new earth and a great holy city - Jerusalem. We also have in Rev.19:16 another name written "King of Kings and Lord of Lords". Does the name belong to the one upon whose garments it is written?

    IMHO the most satisfying answers, to the questions the passage poses, are to be found in a first century explanation. The beast is a man who was worshipped and idolised, supported by a second man/prophet. The Harlot is a city representing false worship, that is burned by kings that support the beast. The horns support the beast and burn the woman. The city was known as a martyr-maker, and so it's a fitting reward. The beast is finally tormented.

    And finally to the name of Rev.17:5 - it cannot be the name of the beast for the beast is not the harlot and the harlot is distinct from the beast. Nonetheless, the beast does have a name, and a number, and a mark, but we are only given the number.

    LT, of the "preterist" class

  • Schizm
    Schizm

    Steve,

    I will return to this thread later, but for right now I want to give you this little tidbit to chew on.

    In chapter 11 of Genesis it's said that the peoples built a city for themselves, called Babel (or Babylon). They also built for themselves the tower of Babel (or Babylon).

    Notice that there are two different entities where both are identified by the title "Babel" (or "Babylon")

    One is a tower, and the other a city. So there was the *tower of Babylon* and the *city of Babylon*.

    I'd also like for you to keep in mind what I said early on in this thread: Anytime the Bible speaks of there being a name on the forehead--whether human, animal, or spirit creature--the name is NEVER the name of the person, animal, or spirit creature. Keep in mind also that where reference is in fact made to the actual name of a spirit creature, then it's written someplace other than the person's forehead.

    Feel free to comment if you wish.

    More later.

    Schizm

    .

  • AuldSoul
    AuldSoul
    Anytime the Bible speaks of there being a name on the forehead--whether human, animal, or spirit creature--the name is NEVER the name of the person, animal, or spirit creature.
    Revelation 14:1 — And I saw, and, look! the Lamb standing upon the Mount Zion, and with him a hundred and forty-four thousand having his name and the name of his Father written on their foreheads.
    Revelation 22:3-5 — And no more will there be any curse. But the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in [the city], and his slaves will render him sacred service; 4 and they will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. 5 Also, night will be no more, and they have no need of lamplight nor [do they have] sunlight, because Jehovah God will shed light upon them, and they will rule as kings forever and ever.

    I didn't include those who receive the mark of the Beast, because that text specified that it could be the name or the number of its name and be positioned on the forehead or right hand.

    LOL! So, you've figured out a rule for intepretting prohecy from a sample of ... let's see, add the ... then carry your ... okay ... two other occurrences. Even though in both other instances (or all three, if you count the mark of the Beast), the Scriptures saw a need to specify that the name was not the name of the bearer and specify whose name it was.

    But in this one instance, you decide both that the name is not the name of the bearer and you decide whose name it is, without anything in the context to indicate your tangential assumption. Brilliant.

    I'll leave you at this point, because you have finally clarified the basis of your argument. Now that you have given what you've been asked for I can judge its merits for myself. Maybe that is why you avoided doing so before.

    AuldSoul

  • LittleToe
    LittleToe

    I thought I already quoted Rev.19:16. Are you saying that the "Word" isn't the "Lord of Lords and King of Kings"? Oh dear, oh dear!

  • Schizm
    Schizm

    Hey, AuldSoul,

    You know what you really ought to do, is provide a link on that website of yours (http://watchtowerwhy.home.mchsi.com/) that will enable your visitors to know that you're the person who posts here at JWD as "AuldSoul". You could even kindly include links to your Post History / Topic History here at JWD, so that your visitors can learn more about the person behind your site.

    Shizm (of the always willing to help out class)

    .

  • stevenyc
    stevenyc

    Schizm, thank you for your reply.

    A question for you:

    Taken for the NWT, the name written on the forehead of the harlot is : "Babylon the Great, the mother of the harlots and of the disgusting things of the earth."

    That being the case, who is the mother of the harlots and of the disgusting things of the earth? Am I to take it that is also the beast, as it is part of the name?

    steve

  • Schizm
    Schizm

    Hey, one queston at a time there Steve! .... I haven't answered your first question yet, and here you are already asking another one.

    1st question: So, how am I reading this wrong?

    Answer: Full answer still pending.

    2nd question (paraphrased): In addition to "Babylon the Great," does the beast's name also include "the mother of the harlots and of the disgusting things of the earth"?

    Answer: Well what do you think, Steve? Does "the mother of the harlots and of the disgusting things of the earth" look like a "name" to you?

    For comparison sake, consider this: If you were to be introduced to the late Johnny Cash's only son, what would you think if you were told that the following was his name in full?

    "John Carter Cash, the son of a Country Music legend and internatonally known star."

    So, really, isn't it apparent that something's wrong with the layout of the wording in Revelation 17:5?

    What we have there in that verse, besides the name of the beast, is words that describe something about the harlot--the woman upon whose forehead the name of the beast is written.

    More later.

    Schizm

    .

  • stevenyc
    stevenyc

    Schizm, thanks again for replying.

    I can wail for the answer to my other question. I'm sure you can understand that when someone proposes a new understanding of ancient texts, you'll get a lot of questions.

    As far as, "Babylon the Great, does the beast's name also include;'the mother of the harlots and of the disgusting things of the earth'", every biblical translation I've read, includes this as part of the title. That, Babylon the great and the mother of harlots etc, is part of the the same title. My Greek is very poor, so do you have a construct of translation that shows that this is separate to the title 'Babylon the great' and then a description of the persona, 'the mother of the harlots and of the disgusting things of the earth'?

    steve

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit