Who really is Babylon the Great?

by sinis 67 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • proplog2
    proplog2

    Heathen:

    I dealt with the "spiritism" angle in my post #1240

    4.) The spiritistic activities of BTG are believed by the Watchtower to be an absolute certification of the identity of BTG as a religious entity. However, in the case of Ninevah we have an example of a political whore described as a sorceress: Nahum 3:4

    "owing to the abundance of prostitution...a mistress of sorceries...ensnaring nations by her acts of prostitution and families by her sorceries."


    If you pick the USA as King of the North then you have no significant place for Russia. The largest country (geographically) on the face of the Earth and which also occupies the Northern Part of the World Island (Asia,Europe, Africa- all connected via land routes) is not something to be ignored. It also has thousands of nukes ready to launch primarily against the USA.

  • proplog2
    proplog2

    jgnat:

    I want to comment on your bringing up one of my more speculative predictions. It is somewhat of a personal attack and is therefore a diversion from what we are discussing.

    It is a way of saying SINCE Proplog2 has in times past made faulty predictions THEREFORE all of his comments about the Bible and Future events are faulty.

    This is a false premise. It is irrelevant what I have said in the past. Just as it is irrelevant what the Watchtower has said in its past. It IS important to analyze what is currently being said by a person and evaluate their premises and conclusions.

    The post I made (which you so kindly pulled up) - dealt with a specific convergence of somewhat significant events. My prediction failed. I don't consider that much different than a Doctors prognosis about the course of a disease. Or perhaps a weatherman's failed forecast. Doctors and Meteorologists don't lose their licences if they make a mistake. My mistake was not in the basic information (which we are discussing here) but in my intuitive leap based upon certain unfolding events. Kind of "cloudy with a chance of Armageddon". or "take two of these and wait for the Great Tribulation".

    I believe its good to develop a strong interpretive base from which it is possible to view significant actions and actors on the world stage and Occasionally stick out your neck and make a prediction. I never have claimed divine guidance - I don't believe in God (guess I lose any potential audience right there).

    I have yet to see anyone come up with a more coherent explanation for the endtime scenario than the one I have been talking about for 25 years. The preterist expanation is born dead. It is a Procrustes bed of failed attempts to fit events that were familiar to the original authors. The sole reason they (preterists) take this direction is that they refuse to believe in even the possibility that anyone could know the future. Yet the writers of Daniel and Revelation spoke about a future they didn't understand - and they referred to it as the "end".

    You are entitled to your assumptions about the meaning of "time of the end". And you probably have a very good fit (not pefect) for those events. But for those who believe there is yet a "time of the end" (after all we ARE still here) I think I have a 99% fit. And I want to entertain challenges to my interpretation by those who believe we are in the "time of the end".

    And there are stronger reasons for believing that Mankind IS facing a castastrophe. Ever since the coming of the Nuclear age it has become possible for a few people to make decisions that could lead the world into an abyss. All the advancements in science and culture could disappear into a dark age of nulcear destruction. I was born a month before Hiroshima. My generation has learned to "live" with this possibility. We even dare to just call it a "possibility" rather than an "inevitablity". Your choice of words is probably rooted in your temperament. But, history is on the side of the pessimist otherwise we would have solved this problem by now.

    So go on ... poke fun. But there are at the very least- two joke lines going in this universe.

    By the way. Do you think Putin is going to REALLY give up his power in 2008 when he is scheduled to step down and make way for a new president? Are you familiar with some of the more common tricks dictators use to make sure they stay in power? Do you remember how Putin came to power in the first place? Daniel 8:24

  • proplog2
    proplog2

    jgnat:

    You thanked Leolia for clearing this up. Here is some stuff she quoted before- making everything clear....

    5) The angel then provides a second interpretation of the seven heads of the beast in Revelation 17:10, claiming that they represent seven kings. Of these, five were described as fallen, one was currently ruling, the seventh was to come for a short while, and an eighth (corresponding to the figure of Nero redivivus) was to follow the seven. Attempts to identify these kings with historical Roman emperors has proven to be notoriously difficult. This is because there was some disagreement over who was the first emperor (e.g. Suetonius and Josephus regarded Julius Caesar as the first emperor, while Tacitus and Vergil regarded Augustus as the first emperor), and whether the three short-lived emperors of AD 68-69 (Galba, Otho, and Vitellius) count or not. Sybilline Oracles 5:35 and Josephus, Jewish War 4.491-99 mentioned Galba, Otho, and Vitellius, but Suetonius (Vespasian, 1) terms the three emperors' reigns as the "rebellion of the three princes" (rebellio trium principum), suggesting that their brief tenure were mere interregna between the reigns of legitimate emperors. Another uncertainty is whether the short-lived seventh king of Revelation 17:10 was intended to correspond with the three emperors of AD 68-69, with one of them, or with the relatively short reign of Titus (AD 79-81). One attractive and popular interpretation is to posit Augustus, Tiberius, Gaius, Claudius, and Nero as the first five emperors, Vespasian as the sixth emperor who "is" (skipping over the three interregna), Titus as the emperor "who must stay for a short while", and Domitian as the final emperor, Nero redivivus. However, Jewish and Christian sources otherwise seem to start with Julius Caesar as the first emperor (cf. Josephus, Antiquities 18.32, Sibylline Oracles 5:12, 4 Ezra 12:15, Barnabas 4:3-6, Theophilus, Ad Autolycum, 3.27), so this solution may well not be correct. It may also be the case that such approaches are somewhat forced since "seven" is a highly symbolic number in Revelation, and so it may not be reasonable to expect a perfect correspondence here.

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos

    Obscura per obscuriora?

    The historical and literary approach of a 1900-year-old text surely leaves room for uncertainty in many details. Whether this uncertainty is to be used as a warrant for any interpretation, out of any plausible historical setting, is another matter.

    (Somehow it reminds me of scholar's peculiar reasoning: since there is no absolute agreement between "worldly scholars" on 587 vs. 586 BC, the "celebrated WT scholars" are warranted to say it's 607 BC.)

    Now proplog, from another of your posts in a different thread I understood (perhaps misunderstood) that you were not absolutely satisfied with classical theism either. If so, how do you figure a text can have future history (by centuries and millenia) ciphered into it?

  • proplog2
    proplog2

    Narkissos:

    You don't have search every book that has been written to look for prophecy. You look at the ones that claim to speak about the future. The Bible is THE religious book of western civilization - and that's where I start.

    The first problem is to see if there is any validity to the Bible's future predictions. I skip over anything that could have been prophecy written after the fact. Alexander the great prophecies are open to this kind of attack. So I focus on those prophecies that seem to have fulfillment in the "time of the end".

    I assume that we are living in the time of the end because if I don't - then I can't expect anything to fit. I believe there are about 10 things that all fit together. Simple probability tells you that calling a coin on 10 flips in a row is beyond chance. But even if you throw out three of the matches because they may be slightly questionable - you still end up with an extremely accurate prediction. The preterists "assume" it has all been settled so they don't have to worry about anything. But there are too many strings left dangling.

    Now I don't make the mistake of believing that the Bible IS what it says it is. Even if an entity stood in front of me and said they were Almighty God and then did some miracles I would be wrong in believing. The entity would have to answer a lot of my questions. For example: How do I know that you are really the Almighty God and not just one of many Gods. I would expect an answer that didn't involve fire, smoke, and earthquakes.

    If you conclude that the Bible contains information about the future then you are confronted with the matter of who has information like that and what is their purpose. The Universe is a strange place. There would have to be some kind of cosmic organization that can access our world. Perhaps they are midwives that help planetary cultures get past "intrinsic sin". When the first replicating molecule appeared you have the beginning of "boundary". There are the chemicals that partake in the process and you have everything else. Eventually you have a cell wall or membrane. The formation of a "self" leads to "selfishness". Evolution is based on selfishness. But at the level of nations- selfishness becomes a rampant killer. That is what I believe is "intrinsic sin". I think there is at least a possibility that some interested entities have tweaked human cultural development and at the same time have adhered to an ethic of minimum interference.

    There is no need to work with all humans all at once. Israel was a cultivated nation. They had unusually strong laws and traditions that allowed them to leave their land and remain Jews. The next step was to sever their need for a geographical location. That was Jesus' function. Christianity was intended to be a break from geographical location - the Jerusalem above. Christianity, as Jesus predicted, was going to go into a dormant stage. Sure enough. It wasn't long before Nationalism took over the Christian idea.

    Enter "the holy ones". The prophesies involve some group that survives Earth's nationalistic rivalries. I believe that group is Jehovah's WItnesses. They have pretty much transcended the "nationality" problem with their world wide brotherhood. They have worked hard and unselfishly to build a world wide network. It is a robust organization- partly because of some of their weird rules. They have not been strictly devoted to quantity. If they just wanted numbers they could easily quadruple their size by changing their stance on blood transfusions, permitting smoking etc. All of this is more tolerable if you look at the universe without the distorting lens of "the Almighty God". You begin to understand certain ambiguities and imperfections. These entities probably aren't looking for absolute salvation but statistical salvation. Kind of the way evolution selects.

    The idea is to produce a hardened cadres of people who serve as a paradigm of survival. If you were a Jew in Nazi Germany and you had a close relative in the United States you had the option of getting out before the noose tightened. Jehovah's Witnesses, because of their brotherood have the possibility of escaping the calamity that is predicted for the USA (Babylon).All of the end-time prophesies include the "flight" aspect that leads to survival.

    The million JW's in the United States could easily be accommodated by their brothers sourth of the border.

    This would be a testimony to the need to jettison nationalism once and for all.

    This is the short version. I won't burden you with the long version.

  • heathen
    heathen

    proplog2--- I definately disagree with you . Russia is not a threat anymore and the only concern for america really is that some radicals will steal the nukes they have stock piled as I've heard many people discuss the stock piles are not closely guarded and could easily be stolen . Even if the whole king of north and south applied to the entire end of gentile times it would be a stretch to include the cold war as the WTBTS does in their publications . There are clearly some serious battles faught between these two which never happened with Russia . I think we are looking exclusively at the final battle for domination over the earth just prior to the end as it's mentioned in those passages . I mean it says these things will take place at the time of the end, in the passages.

    Israel was also called a harlot when they went apostate so your argument on nineveth is nothing more than strawman.

  • proplog2
    proplog2

    Heathen:

    Russia is NOT a threat anymore? You are obviously reading US newspapers and probably worse - Watching American Television. Do you consider several thousand nuclear missiles aimed at the US and ready to launch on warning NOT a threat?

    Ninevah was a political entity. It was referred to as a sorceress. Therefore it is wrong to assume that an entity that carries on spiritistic practices has to be a relgious entity. I may be guilty of a lot of fallacies and love to have them pointed out to me. But- I don't see where this is a straw man.

  • heathen
    heathen

    proplog2--- Your argument gets more and more absurd the further we go on . OK then whey does God call his people out of babylon if it's a country ? There's noway God would ask his people to make a mass exodus out of the United States that's just plain ridiculous .

    Russias nuclear capability is so out dated , they can't even fund it anymore . They were asking or rather demanding money from the US to fund it and they did make some threats . Whether or not the US gave in is another matter I don't know . It would be foolish for russia today to get on the US bad side , since most of it's satelite countries are now dependent on the US and the chinese are right next door and in desperate need of russian energy supplies . What if the chinese just up and decide to do an Iraq on russia? The russians are just as corrupt as the sadaam rule in Iraq .It just would not make any sense for Russia to start rattling their sabres at the US .

  • proplog2
    proplog2

    Heathen:

    OK then why does God call his people out of babylon if it's a country ? There's noway God would ask his people to make a mass exodus out of the United States that's just plain ridiculous .

    God(whomever) can DO that. God (?) supposedly arranged a mass Exodous from Egypt. There's a book about it. Remember? It follows Genesis.

    Now about nuclear weapons capabilities. The USA has a better equipped nuclear arsenal than Russia. The USA after all is the sole super power. Russia's arsenal has continued to deteriorate. Its radar is useless against stealth bombers. It can't detect attacks from submarines - especially from the Pacific. The United States has an overwhelming ability to destroy Russia's nuclear weapons if the US decides to strike first. The US has changed its No First Strike policy which was a left-over from defending Europe from a Warsaw pact invasion.

    So this leaves Russia with no other choice but to launch immediately if they suspect in any way that the USA might try a first strike. Rather than making things safer the lack of parity makes things more dangerous.

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos

    Thanks for your response proplog

    The first problem is to see if there is any validity to the Bible's future predictions. I skip over anything that could have been prophecy written after the fact. Alexander the great prophecies are open to this kind of attack. So I focus on those prophecies that seem to have fulfillment in the "time of the end".

    If you refer to Daniel, the obvious problem is that there is no gap, no perceptible hiatus in the text between the Hellenistic period and the "time of the end". Of course the "end" is referred to as distant future from the 6th century BC setting (2:28; 8:17,19; 10:14; 11:35,40; 12:4,9,13) but as you admit the possibility of prophecy ex eventu you know that this 6th-century setting is fictional, and that the apparent long-range perspective belongs to the fiction. Iow, the fictional 6th-century Daniel predicts 2nd-century events as belonging to the distant time of the end. The fictional interval is over 3 centuries -- no suggestion is made of another 21+ centuries interval between Antiochus and the "end".

    Again, I agree that the end as the author of Daniel envisioned did not come in Hellenistic times. At the very moment the prophecy ceased to be ex eventu and became a true, futuristic prophecy for the immediate future (from a 2nd-century BC perspective) it also went wrong.

    I assume that we are living in the time of the end because if I don't - then I can't expect anything to fit.

    Indeed, this begs the question: why should you?

    I believe there are about 10 things that all fit together. Simple probability tells you that calling a coin on 10 flips in a row is beyond chance. But even if you throw out three of the matches because they may be slightly questionable - you still end up with an extremely accurate prediction. The preterists "assume" it has all been settled so they don't have to worry about anything. But there are too many strings left dangling.

    The problem is when you come back to the "dangling strings" of a failed prophecy many centuries later it changes the "probabilities". The original actors (Hellenistic Syria and Egypt) have long left the scene and the remaining symbols (beasts, horns, king of the North and king of the South) are now free "unknowns" that you can apply to about any current antagonism. The text, out of its original context, doesn't offer resistance anymore. You are left alone with your imagination and wandering symbols. What becomes really central to your interpretation is not the text, but your world vision and personal biography. America and JWs are "naturally" read into the text from your perspective -- which would seem ludicrous from another perspective.

    I just respond so that you may understand my perspective, as you have been kind enough to explain yours. I'm not trying to convince you. And actually I think your interpretation is no less "warranted," in principle, that the early Christian reading of of Daniel for instance. The NT writers did just what you do, trying to make sense of the "dangling strings" of an old text from their own beliefs and experience.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit