by Bonnie_Clyde 44 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Tashawaa
Hey - this is the BEST argument I have ever seen for a literal 144k. Its short, and to the point. I didn't have to sift thru paragraphs of reasoning to see his point (unlike Leolaia who makes my head hurt )
LOL, I'm glad you liked it! I like to be brief. Some posts make my head hurt too!
I find myself in full agreement with Flash, that the 144,000 is a literal number.
I want to address an assumed "problem" that Nark speaks of:
I only tried to highlight a formal inconsistency in your reasoning: you say (1) 144,000 is a literal number because the lamb is literally one (although the figure "one" is actually not in the text, as Leolaia pointed out), and "it was unreasonable to think that the statement made in verse one would be split and be both literal and symbolic....It makes sense to me." And then you say that (2) in Revelation 7:4ff the number 144,000 is literal and the number 12,000 is symbolic. This time it is not "unreasonable to think that the statement [is] split and be both literal and symbolic." See the problem?--Narkissos.
There are those who will argue that if the 144,000 is assumed to be a literal number, then, to be consistant, the 12 tribes must ALSO be veiwed as literally being the 12 tribes of ancient Israel. But what if there is a similar example elsewhere in the Bible in which one number is literal but the other number is symbolic? My reference is to Revelation 13:1. The wild beast described there has 7 heads and 10 horns. Whereas the 7 (heads) is in fact a literal number, the 10 (horns) is NOT a literal number.
Of course you may disagree with my interpretation of the heads and horns themselves, but that's just tough poo poo. So, anyway, here goes:
The 7 heads refer to those 7 "kings" that have exercised Universal Rule over mankind throughout history (Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, etc). Now the Bible itself shows that the entire 10 horns sit perched atop the 7th head. Control over mankind would be passed from one head to the next head until all 7 heads had had its turn at the exercise of Universal Rule. Rome = the 6th head. When Rome "fell" she passed the mantle of Universal Rule into the hands of a 10-horned 7th head at THAT time, which means that the 7th head has now been on the scene for a very long time and it expresses its rule by means of the 10 horns. So what governments do the 10 horns represent who have been ruling simultaneously over all of mankind from the time of Rome's fall on down to our present day? If the 10 were in fact a literal number, then history itself should point to 10 governments that have held such position. But that hasn't been the case, has it? Yet the 10-horned 7th head had to have been ruling from the time that Rome fell. The 10 horns did indeed begin their rule at the fall of Rome. Who then are the 10 horns? Obviously they are not governments which are literally 10 in number, as has already been said. The fact is that when Rome fell, the control she had exercised over mankind was then passed into the hands of any and all governments that existed or would come to exist. The "10" is therefore not a LITERAL number. Instead, it's a symbolic number that stands for the entire sum of something, which in this case is the entire sum of all governments (which, of course, number far more that a mere 10).
So you see, when it comes to Revelation 13:1, there is the literal AND the symbolic referred to in the same verse. Interestingly, we see a comparable thing when it comes to Revelation 7:4 ... the 144,000 being a literal number but the 12 tribes NOT being literally the 12 tribes of ancient Israel.
.
How does the Bible student discern the difference between passages that contain figurative language, and those that strictly are literal? There is much confusion in the religious world regarding this issue.
A. Words must be interpreted literally unless the sense implies an impossibility.
B. Words must be interpreted literally unless the sense implies a contradiction.
C. Words must be interpreted literally unless the sense implies an absurdity.
D. The nature of a biblical book may provide a clue, suggesting that the student is to watch for an abundance of figures of speech.
In other words, if you read the text LITERALLY, and it is impossible, a contradiction or absurd - then make it figurative to either make it ?make sense? or to ?back your beliefs?.
Don?t believe me???? The ?Christian Courier? explain why the ?Creative Days? are literal and the ?Thousand Years? are figurative.
1 The ?days? of the creation week are divided into periods of light and darkness (vv. 4-5). The ?days? are distinguished from ?years? (v. 14). And the ?days? are subsequently defined by Moses as the same type of ?day? as the Sabbath which the Hebrews were required to observe (Ex. Archives section for 2 Regarding the ?thousand years? of Revelation 20, it should be observed that the opening of the book itself provides caution that this is a document characterized by symbols (see ?signified? - 1:1). In addition, the ?thousand years? of Revelation 20 is nestled in the midst of a number of other dramatic figures ? a pit, a great chain, the dragon/serpent, thrones, a beast, a mysterious ?mark,? resurrections, etc. Why should the pit, chain, dragon, etc., be viewed as figures, and yet the ?thousand years? be singled out as literal? That defies common sense.
BibleGod is not a God of confusion
Schizm...What you just said doesn't help Flash's argument regarding Revelation 14:1. On the basis of Revelation 13:1, you argue that a passage can mention both literal AND symbolic numbers in the same verse. Then you use that to interpret Revelation 7:4 as permitting a literal 144,000 and a symbolic 12 tribes. But then the 144,000 in Revelation 14:1 must be literal because it is mentioned in the same verse with "one" Lamb?
You also say:
The "10" is therefore not a LITERAL number. Instead, it's a symbolic number that stands for the entire sum of something, which in this case is the entire sum of all governments (which, of course, number far more that a mere 10).
I would argue that the same is true with the 144,000. It's very simple. It stands for "the entire sum" of spiritual Israel (which, of course numbers far more than a mere 144,000), which in this case is the sum of 12 symbolic tribes. The number 144,000 is transparently the multiple of the squares of the symbolic numbers 10 (10 x 10) and 12 (12 x 12). Both 10 and 12 recur in Revelation as symbolic numbers. We have the 10 horns of the dragon (12:3; 13:1; 17:4, 7), the ten crowns on each horn (13:1), the ten kingships of 17:12, and so forth. We also have the 12 months of the year, the 12 tribes of Israel (21:12), the 12 apostles (21:14), the twelve stars borne by the mother of the Messiah (12:1), the 12 foundation stones of New Jerusalem (21:14), the 12 gates to the city (21:12, 21), and the 12 crops of fruit borne by the Tree of Life (22:2). The square of 10, namely 100, is also a symbolic number (Revelation 16:21; compare Jeremiah 52:23; Ezekiel 40:19, 23, 27, 47, 41:13-15, 42:2, 4, 8), and so is the square of 12, namely 144, which is mentioned as a symbolic number in Revelation 21:17 as the height of the wall of New Jerusalem in 144 cubits. That the 12,000 making up the 144,000 is symbolic can also be seen in comparing with the dimensions of New Jerusalem in Revelation 21:16, which measures the length, width, and height of the city as 12,000 stadia. All these numbers as symbolic!
I think, since Revelation is predominantly composed of figurative language and symbolic numbers, the burden of proof is on showing that the number is intended to be literal (as perhaps the case might be for the 1,000 years of Revelation 20, and even this is quite unclear) rather the other way around. The "proof" offered for treating it as literal, imho, does not come close to meeting this burden of proof.
But then the 144,000 in Revelation 14:1 must be literal because it is mentioned in the same verse with "one" Lamb?
No, I didn't say that.
The "10" is therefore not a LITERAL number. Instead, it's a symbolic number that stands for the entire sum of something, which in this case is the entire sum of all governments (which, of course, number far more that a mere 10).I would argue that the same is true with the 144,000. It's very simple. It stands for "the entire sum" of spiritual Israel (which, of course numbers far more than a mere 144,000),
You have just made the Bible even more of a challenge to understand than what it actually is. You would have both numbers (10 and 144000) being used to "represent the entire sum of something"?
I'm sorry, but Schizm is ROFLHAO!
.
No, I didn't say that.
I didn't say that you did. I was pointing out how it doesn't help Flash's argument.
You have just made the Bible even more of a challenge to understand than what it actually is. You would have both numbers (10 and 144000) being used to "represent the entire sum of something"?
Of course. Revelation is full of such numbers, not just 10 and 144,000 being numbers of completeness, but as I pointed out, also 12 and 100 and 144 and 12,000 and 7 and so forth. I'm sure you are aware of this. As for squaring numbers as is done in the case of the 144,000 and the measurements of New Jerusalem, I would guess that this is supposed to convey a sense of heavenly greatness reserved for New Jerusalem and those who inhabit it.
The number 144,000 is a combination of symbolic numbers. Leolaia plainly laid out what this was.
No different than "666". 6 means imperfect and it is listed "3" times meaning emphasis.
Flash:
Sorry dude, your argument just got undermined by Schizm's support. Not anything he said, perse, but just because his theology is usually incredibly wrong
Try this on for size, for simplicity (Rev.7):
IMHO they are all the same group of Christians (spiritual Israel).
I'll just pick up one detail in Schizm's post to show how far his (or the WT's) perspective on Revelation is from what the text actually says:
the 7th head has now been on the scene for a very long time
Revelation 17:9ff reads:
This calls for a mind that has wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman is seated; also, they are seven kings, of whom five have fallen, one is living, and the other has not yet come; and when he comes, he must remain only a little while. As for the beast that was and is not, it is an eighth but it belongs to the seven, and it goes to destruction. And the ten horns that you saw are ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom, but they are to receive authority as kings for one hour, together with the beast.IOW, there is nothing in Revelation that exceeds the historical scope of the Roman empire. As in the rest of NT apocalypticism, the "end" was due to come in that time (1:3; 2:16; 3:11; 22:7,12,20). It just didn't.
Didier:
I agree.
It then behoves modern-day apologists to find a significance for "the end", occuring at that time
