“I will build it up “ is also symbolic poetic language because dead Jesus could not raise himself up from the dead referring to the temple of his body being resurrected. It is also an ironic allusion to the Temple that would be destroyed and replaced by the new Jerusalem consisting of his joint heirs and himself in heaven. Jerusalem will be trampled by the nations— trampled implies the earth compared to heavenly Jerusalem which cannot be trampled.
Fisherman
JoinedPosts by Fisherman
-
8
Temple Talk
by peacefulpete inrecall the famous charge made against jesus in his trial in the gospel mark: .
“we heard him say, ‘i will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days i will build another, not made with hands.’”.
matt has a shorter version which likely reflects what he saw in his copy of mark *:.
-
-
-
349
Who really is the Faithful and Discreet Slave?
by Godlyman inif anyone were to come up to you claiming that they are the faithful and discreet slave, how would you go about proving them to be false, based upon scripture?.
estephan.
-
-
Fisherman
In the old thread above I argue that the number 70 was meant and understood by ancient Semitic people as symbolic of a generation and not a literal number.
Was 70 CE not year 70 either?
While the number 70 is used symbolically in the Bible, the quantity is literal.
2 Chronicles 36:21
לְמַלֹּאות דְּבַר־יְהוָה בְּפִי יִרְמְיָהוּ עַד־רָצְתָה הָאָרֶץ אֶת־שַׁבְּתוֹתֶיהָ כָּל־יְמֵי הָשַּׁמָּה שָׁבָתָה לְמַלֹּאות שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָֽה ׃ פ
2 Chronicles 36:21 To fulfil the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed her sabbaths: for as long as she lay desolate she kept sabbath, to fulfil threescore and ten years. = 70
The Bible uses this word having the numerical value of 70.
(I posted in another thread that the Israelites were flagrantly raping the land by not allowing her to enjoy Sabbatical rest as prescribed in the Torah. How many years exactly did the land not keep Sabbath is not known but the sentence imposed was 70 years of desolation so the land could rest.) 537BCE+70=607BCE, assuming 537 marks the end of the desolation.
-
349
Who really is the Faithful and Discreet Slave?
by Godlyman inif anyone were to come up to you claiming that they are the faithful and discreet slave, how would you go about proving them to be false, based upon scripture?.
estephan.
-
-
Fisherman
to prove that there was indeed a Jewish exile of 70 years
Scholar
Do you think there was anything at all Jesus could have done to convince the Jewish leaders besides telling them that they were right and he was wrong? In a Court of law, you might be able to convince a judge or a jury but not an advocate even if he knows the truth. An advocate does not consider evidence or proof and change his position. He wants to win. You need to convince the Court.
-
121
Babylon the Great
by Godlyman indo jw's still believe that babylon the great is the empire of false religion?
inquiring minds want to know .
estephan.
-
-
Fisherman
TD
Thanks for sharing the interesting commentary. You made reference to this before in a previous post. John is not disputed to be the writer and if that is true, there is an obvious difference in style when reading Revelation in English compared to his other books even without analyzing and comparing his use of Greek words. The English translation reader would obviously have to believe the commentator on John’s Greek but would still believe Revelation is inspired based on the internal substance of the book and would not think the anomaly you describe is relevant given the subject matter and uniqueness of the book which ties in all books of the bible together (from a Christological point of view). Maybe John ate too many boloney sandwiches in prison or drank a couple of beers before writing the book but the Bible author who caused the sun and moon to (appear to?) stand still could turn whatever John wrote into inspired. The premise is “inspired”. If the premise fall apart, everything is junk.
Isn't that a circular prior assumption of your own viewpoint?
I think I also posted that BTG was not destroyed in the manner described in Rev, therefore, it hasn’t been destroyed yet. My point is that if the Bible isn’t inspired then BTG doesn’t have to be destroyed or doesn’t have to be destroyed in the manner described in Revelation but looking at the book as if it is inspired, BTG has not been destroyed as described in Revelation.
Respectfully,
Fisherman
-
349
Who really is the Faithful and Discreet Slave?
by Godlyman inif anyone were to come up to you claiming that they are the faithful and discreet slave, how would you go about proving them to be false, based upon scripture?.
estephan.
-
-
Fisherman
The FDS shoe only fits the JW. It is obviously not Christendom as I showed in another thread was utterly defeated circa 1919 in their attempts to stop the JW movement.
-
121
Babylon the Great
by Godlyman indo jw's still believe that babylon the great is the empire of false religion?
inquiring minds want to know .
estephan.
-
-
Fisherman
The book wasn't written to you.
First of all keep in mind 2 very important factors: 1. The author of Revelation is God and 2. Babylon the Great has not been destroyed yet. Ergo (as you use this word) Rev must have been written for the reader at a different point in time also, when the things written actually take place; That is what the author, God, must of had in mind. Like the epistles and other Bible books that were not only written for the contemporary people but in addition for everyone, and also when having prophetic significance, especially for the people at the time the things written take place, for example the disgusting thing causing desolation and the prophecies that were written to comfort the Jewish people at the time but also had greater prophetic significance as Jesus explained the prophecies showing people that they applied to him also at the time.
-
121
Babylon the Great
by Godlyman indo jw's still believe that babylon the great is the empire of false religion?
inquiring minds want to know .
estephan.
-
-
Fisherman
You know it’s a metaphor right?
Irrelevant. All your commentary is red herring. The allusion “disgusting thing” is idolatry or the practice of idolatry, and the mother of that cannot be secular which the bible depicts as male. Religious entities in the Bible are females such as Jerusalem, the Jewish system of worship, the symbolic wife of God. From Nimrod down through the ages, acts of child sacrifice, sex worship, and all the horrific and adhoring acts and practices religious bodies empowered by their consorts, secular governments. The destruction of BTG can only mean the extermination of all religious practices and bodies by the their very lovers, the kings of the earth. That’s how we @ JW see it. Not trying to be apologetic here to win an argument. Mentally I am convinced. The fate of BTG could not be more ironic. Good for her!
-
121
Babylon the Great
by Godlyman indo jw's still believe that babylon the great is the empire of false religion?
inquiring minds want to know .
estephan.
-
-
Fisherman
Rome was specifically a city that governed an empire with authority over its various client kingdoms.
Fallacy. Rome was an Empire. Neither was it the mother of all disgusting things of the earth as I have explained. And as I have explained it did not have the fate of BTG. Sure TD understands.
-
121
Babylon the Great
by Godlyman indo jw's still believe that babylon the great is the empire of false religion?
inquiring minds want to know .
estephan.
-
-
Fisherman
Nope. Begging the question. No reason whatsoever to preemptively grant that the book is magical
Fallacy. Sure Dr. “TD” agrees. I have already explained why in a previous post. If you refuse to understand, too bad.
You would have to prove that the Bible writer was a clown and meant the Roman Empire and he was wrong. In that case tge Bible is a sham. Again, if it is not a sham then Rome is obviously not the identity of BTG to those of us who believe the Bible is inspired.
-
121
Babylon the Great
by Godlyman indo jw's still believe that babylon the great is the empire of false religion?
inquiring minds want to know .
estephan.
-
-
Fisherman
Rome was already viewed as a "Greater Babylon" for having conquered Judea just as Babylon had done centuries earlier.
That doesn’t prove their views were right. Nothing stops people from misinterpreting Bible prophecy or having erroneous conclusions about what the Bible means.
In Revelation 16:19 she is described as a city of the nations and not identified as a nation or an empire. In Revelation 17:5 she is described as the mother of disgusting things of earth. That isn’t secular. In the Hebrew bible it identifies idols. So the mother would not be a world government or empire—which also has a different destruction in Revelation. Throughout human history humanity till this day including nations practice heathenism, some emperors like in Japan also idolized. The Roman empire doesn’t fit cinderella’s shoe. Neither did Rome have the same ending as BTG pictured in Rev.
Given the book of Revelation is from God, it is non sequitur that the BTG was Rome because Rome was not destroyed like BTG, Constantine and the Roman Catholic Church till this day, no Roman Empire today, and still waiting for BTG whatever her identity is to suffer the fate told in Revelation. It makes a lot of sense to me that idolatrous lies and its mother identifies the religious entities of the world.