Religions can’t all be right. But they can all be wrong.
Posts by Jeffro
-
121Babylon 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.
-
-
-
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.
-
-
-
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.
-
-
Jeffro
🙄 The 'Bible Students' in 1919 had no concept of a 'world empire of false religion'. The term is nonsense invented by the Watch Tower Society in 1963. Jehovah's Witnesses is just another nutty Adventist denomination, and they spout various things that are not mentioned in the Bible. For example:
- a global paradise
- a great spiritual temple
- 70 years of Jewish exile
- separate 'earthly or heavenly hopes'
- resurrection during the 1,000 years
- a 'final test' after 1,000 years
Pretty much all of their teachings relating to the 'end times' are not only wrong but also in the wrong order compared to what the Bible actually says.
As such, they are just one more of the 'false religions' that they denounce.
-
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.
-
-
Jeffro
Fisherman:
Rome was also one of the kings of the earth and like the other kings had sex with this woman. This is obvious.
Gotta love JW 'logic'. A 'woman' that is acknowledged to be metaphorical (and which is explicitly identified as a city with a kingdom over other kings matching Rome's relationship to its client kingdoms) 'must' 'literally' be 'having sex' with 'all the kings' which 'obviously includes Rome' (though the passage doesn't say 'all' nor does it specify Rome as one of the kings). 🤦♂️But when the Bible directly states, in a passage that Christians consider to be literal that Jesus will be above "all things" (Colossians 1:16-17), JWs feel the need to insert the word "other", which does not appear in the original text. What a joke. 🤣
-
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.
-
-
Jeffro
🤦♂️
-
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.
-
-
Jeffro
Fisherman:
WT interpretation is quite logical because she is a political consort and could not also be political herself
Haha. So very obviously wrong. The Roman Empire was explicitly a city with a kingdom over other kings. Compare Revelation 17:18.
-
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.
-
-
Jeffro
Yes, they still teach that totally wrong interpretation. The Watch Tower Society began using the expression “world empire of false religion” in 1963 (in “Babylon the Great Has Fallen!”, God’s Kingdom Rules!). Prior to that, it associated “Babylon the Great” with ‘Christendom’, further contradicting the claim that special ‘enlightenment’ was provided to them in 1919.
“Babylon the Great” in Revelation represents ancient Rome, which has been understood for many centuries, and Christians could readily identify “Babylon the Great” as Rome when Revelation was first written. Revelation 17:9 guides the reader to the actual identity of “Babylon the Great”, with its statement that the “seven heads” of the ‘beast’ she rides represent “seven mountains”—the ‘seven hills of Rome’. (Coins minted during the reign of Vespasian depict Roma—a female deity who personified Rome—seated on seven hills.) This would be an obvious clue to 1st-century Christians, who were well aware of Rome as an enemy of Christianity. Additionally, the reference to “disgusting things” at Revelation 17:4 and 5 is reminiscent of the earlier warning to flee Jerusalem before the Roman attack in 70 CE (Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14).
The Roman Empire oversaw various subordinate client kingdoms, each with its own ‘king’. Judea was itself one such client kingdom, under the jurisdiction of Herod, who is described as a king at Matthew 2:3 and Mark 6:14 using the same Greek term as at Revelation 17:2 (basileus, βασιλεύς, Strong’s G935). Revelation 17:18 accurately describes “Babylon the Great”—that is, ancient Rome—as a city with a kingdom over other kings.
No mystery, no nonsense.
-
19
Who wrote the book of Hebrews?
by Fisherman inthere are good reasons to belief that paul wrote hebrews.
i am convinced he wrote it.
is there any any convincing evidence or argument that can validate the belief?.
-
-
Jeffro
🤦♂️
-
19
Who wrote the book of Hebrews?
by Fisherman inthere are good reasons to belief that paul wrote hebrews.
i am convinced he wrote it.
is there any any convincing evidence or argument that can validate the belief?.
-
-
Jeffro
Fisherman:
Paul may have deliberately omitted his name in writing to the Hebrews in Judea, since his name had been made an object of hatred by the Jews there. —Acts 21:28
The writer of Hebrews was in Italy and was associated with Timothy. These facts fit Paul. —Heb. 13:23, 24
Haha. I knew in advance that you’d just do a quote grab from the JW “All Scripture” book (page 243). Very bad form not citing your source.
Those aren’t reasons, they are speculation.
-
19
Who wrote the book of Hebrews?
by Fisherman inthere are good reasons to belief that paul wrote hebrews.
i am convinced he wrote it.
is there any any convincing evidence or argument that can validate the belief?.
-
-
Jeffro
Fisherman:
There are good reasons to belief that Paul wrote Hebrews.
Are there? What are they? Authorship was already unknown at the end of the first century and it isn’t in Paul’s style.
Is there any any convincing evidence or argument that can validate the belief?
One would expect so, since you say there are good reasons for 'beliefing' it.