by N.drew 69 Replies latest watchtower bible
Revelation 11:8
And their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which mystically is called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified. Revelation 11:8
simple explanation - bravo ndrew
What I understand "Egypt" to mean is only what I see. It means the people are rejecting life by first leaning on understanding that was passed on from a person who is dead. And secondly it means occupying one's self with their own death, instead of their own life. |
this is very clear
Sodom and Egypt is a mystrical reference to where the messiah was impaled. The messiah at the second coming is the prodigal son, who is black and gay. So Egypt is a reference to the Afro-American sub-culture and Sodom to the gay sub-culture.
"Wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together." (Matthew 24:28) The "two witnesses" are the secret elect (eagles) directly involved with the messiah from the time of his birth, thus they share the context of the "city" or living place where the messiah dwells, which is under the black and gay subcultures.
Food for thought.
Anyway, in answer to your question, Egypt is a reference to African, and Sodom is a rerference to homosexuality, generally speaking. The 2nd coming messiah resembles and "Ethiopian eunuch", meaning a gay black male.
LS
Sodom and Egypt is a mystrical reference to where the messiah was impaled. The messiah at the second coming is the prodigal son, who is black and gay. So Egypt is a reference to the Afro-American sub-culture and Sodom to the gay sub-culture.
Seriously, you're not the freaking messiah! Get help.
Seriously, you're not the freaking messiah
... you're a very naughty boy!
Yeah, I know it's an oft-used gag, but I still couldn't resist 
I do not know the Truth„™ My take is that what is the point of leaving the WTBTS to set up WTBTS like craziness, viewing the Bible as a fundamentalist. You can focus on obscure scriptures and miss the main point of the author. For me, the historical method exploded the Witness theories portrayed as absolute truth. Academic also do not know the Truth™. Their method has a certain humility completely lacking in the Witnesses. The Witnesses Bible truth is imposed with very serous consequences for secretly embracing questions. I have several academic religous books that are essays of scholar politely discussing their different views with complete civility. Rather than civility, the Witnesses predict you will die a horrible death.
I've mentioned that some part of me misses the certainty. There is a point where the price of certainty is not worth the feeling. Within about 100 years, the studies of the NT have progressed far. The genie is out of the battle. I ate from the tree of knowledge. Now it is hard to have any intellectual respect for those who cling to Witness beliefs. Sticking to their methodology imprisons you. The entire universe is offering differing modes of approaching the problem. God created us with this power so how can it be wrong.
I respect the individuals who have left the Witnesses physically but are trapped in the same mind set. It takes time. But I have little respect for thier analysis and trying to place the marvel of the Bible into narrow strictures. Embrace life, God created it. Embrance knowledge, God provided it. Chimpanzees might have complete obedience to God and have little knowledge of their nakedness. We don't clothe chimpanzees. God created humans with knowledge. What the f.....did he expect would happen?
| TD | Re: We know what Babylon means. What does Egypt mean? posted ~ 22 hours ago (1/14/2012) |
|---|---|
Post 3835 of 3838 Since 5/14/2001 | Your talking about the whole then not. So how can anyone answer that? Not at all. I've pointed out that there is no whole. You don't seem to be the hit and run type. Please explain to us (and if anyone else knows what this means, please explain it to me) what "there is no whole" means. |
N.drew
Please, how can there be no whole? Whole what? What is there no whole of?
There is no "whole" when it comes to the sixty-six book compilation called the "Bible" It is a very loosely organized anthology where the various authors didn't all speak the same language, were separated by centuries and held vastly different theological views.
I think this is what I sort of said - The grammatical sense of words no longer suffices for interpretation;
I quoted an excerpt from The Parousia by James Stuart Russell (No relation to Charles Taze) The quote was a "common sense" appeal worded for outrageous effect. Russell was not agreeing with the idea that words should be evaluated beyond what normal rules of grammar and definition would allow, he actually spent several hundred pages deconstructing the whole idea.
I don't mean to be offensive, but suspect that there is some sort of communication barrier here (?)
I suspect my intellectual capacity is at least a little above average.
You'll have to judge that for yourself. I gave the basic etymology of the word, "Babylon" and you seemed to think it was a cause for laughter, so I don't know what to think personally.
You gave me the meaning from the perspective of the inhabitants of Babylon. Did you not? I think that is funny. As funny as sharing "accurate knowledge" that comes from the WTBTS.
Was it not obvious that the question refers to what the Hebrews consider Babylon? Surely they don't believe it is the Gate of the Gods?
Thank you for being reasonable TD.
at OUTLAW.
I posted my response in the previous post, then it switched pages.
________________________________________________________
What would you think if your very gay friend was to go to Thailand*? What might pop into your head?
I am sure that the Scipture writer had something in mind when he wrote "Egypt" or "Babylon" other than the country and it's inhabitants.
The question of the OP was "what"? What was in the mind of the writer when the writer wrote "Egypt"?
*I might be wrong about the country, but do you get the drift?
