Just 2p, since I revisited this, briefly, just last week.
The fourth beast, of Daniel 7, also had ten horns.
But then an eleventh one sprouted forth, comparable to the image of the wild beast in Revelation.
above is a picture whereby the scarlet beast of revelation 17 is portrayed, with the harlot aboard.
(i found it somewhere on the internet on friday.
) notice the horns ... the manner in which they are presented as being shared by all but one of the seven heads.
Just 2p, since I revisited this, briefly, just last week.
The fourth beast, of Daniel 7, also had ten horns.
But then an eleventh one sprouted forth, comparable to the image of the wild beast in Revelation.
what happend inn the word now?.
us is the word police doing what they want, putting peopel in prision and bombing innocent peopel,.
and yesterday he come upp widh a crazy idea that other countrys must pay tax on 30% iff they want to sell steel to us, and what will happend, europe must akt inn the same way, perhaps 30% on evry car imported from us, i must say i think this man is a dissaster for us.
belbab:
Although my comment was in reaction to happyman's post the question was, in fact, generic.
I must have missed his original posts, because I don't make it a habit to heckle people learning English as a second language.
It wasn't until his second post of the thread, with the irregular spelling of "jehoca" that I looked at the country of origin.
happyman:
Sorry, about the language thing, my bad.
On the religion thing, you're missing the fact that only approximately 1% of JW's claim to have Christ as their mediator.
With no "covenant for the earth", inaugurated with blood by a mediator, it leaves the other 99% up sh*t creek without a paddle.
This is a far more fundamental issue (IMHO) than pacifism, since going to war will only get you killed in body.
i have never read in the watchtower publications any.
indication that charles t. russell was baptised!.
in everything that i have read about ctr, no year of.
SS:
I've been wondering about that one recently, as well as the precedent for baptism, generally.
I can only put it down to the priestly practice of bathing before the atonement sacrifice.
John's dad was a priest (Luke 1).
Just a thought
what happend inn the word now?.
us is the word police doing what they want, putting peopel in prision and bombing innocent peopel,.
and yesterday he come upp widh a crazy idea that other countrys must pay tax on 30% iff they want to sell steel to us, and what will happend, europe must akt inn the same way, perhaps 30% on evry car imported from us, i must say i think this man is a dissaster for us.
Ok, so I can't count, and neither can I edit to make my stupidity go away!
what happend inn the word now?.
us is the word police doing what they want, putting peopel in prision and bombing innocent peopel,.
and yesterday he come upp widh a crazy idea that other countrys must pay tax on 30% iff they want to sell steel to us, and what will happend, europe must akt inn the same way, perhaps 30% on evry car imported from us, i must say i think this man is a dissaster for us.
Can someone clarify two things for me?
One, why do JW apologists feel the need to spell badly?
For one, I can't merely put it down to poor education.
Is it a new form of mind control, to make you concentrate?
Two, Does anyone still believe that the President really is in control?
In fact does any world ruler have carte blanche to make decisions?
Also, has he always walked like John Wayne Bobbit?
above is a picture whereby the scarlet beast of revelation 17 is portrayed, with the harlot aboard.
(i found it somewhere on the internet on friday.
) notice the horns ... the manner in which they are presented as being shared by all but one of the seven heads.
This is an excellent pickup!!!
You lose points for posting in the wrong section, though. This should be in bible research.
It may seem a bit pedantic, but if stuff got posted in the right sections it would save a lot of time seaching!
Now I'm gonna dive back in my hole, and re-read those passages of Revelation, again.
i've argued before in this forum that mark wanted to have jesus seem to be the messiah whose existence he believed--or pretended to believe--was prophesied, foreshadowed, or prefigured, by persons and events found in scripture, so he scoured the writings of the prophets for these stories, and adapted them to fit jesus.
i believe the striking parallels below show almost conclusively that mark's story about jesus stilling the storm was adapted from jonah, and is fictional.. in jonah, a violent storm threatens a ship on which jonah sleeps, so mark made a violent storm threaten a ship on which jesus sleeps.
in jonah, the apprehensive sailors waken jonah and question his cavalier attitude toward the danger, so mark made his boat's captain apprehensive also, and had him, too, waken jesus and question him about his seeming lack of concern.
Joseph:
Only fundamentalists who deliberately blind themselves to the obvious can fail to see that Mark wanted his readers to think of Jonah
You're looking at this from the point of view of the fundamentalist who believes all of the Bible stories are literally true.
Seems to me that you're trying to inflame the argument with implied labels.
I believe there are sufficient details in this thread to highlight that the theory proposed is tentative at best, and in reality a complete non-starter.
For another nail, albeit a small one - since the "story" of Jesus is so elaborate, do you really think that Mark would need to fall back on repetition because he'd run out of ides?
If you think that nail is weak, then I would suggest that it is as weak as the original theory presented here.
i've argued before in this forum that mark wanted to have jesus seem to be the messiah whose existence he believed--or pretended to believe--was prophesied, foreshadowed, or prefigured, by persons and events found in scripture, so he scoured the writings of the prophets for these stories, and adapted them to fit jesus.
i believe the striking parallels below show almost conclusively that mark's story about jesus stilling the storm was adapted from jonah, and is fictional.. in jonah, a violent storm threatens a ship on which jonah sleeps, so mark made a violent storm threaten a ship on which jesus sleeps.
in jonah, the apprehensive sailors waken jonah and question his cavalier attitude toward the danger, so mark made his boat's captain apprehensive also, and had him, too, waken jesus and question him about his seeming lack of concern.
I was going to reply again, but RWC took the words from my mouth.
Nicely put, RWC.
ok, this post isn't out to prove anything, other than i've got too much time on my hands, which alot of you know that already.. over my morning coffee this morning i decided to read the section of the bible dealing with nimrod and the tower of babel.
i have two bibles at home the nwt and the new american standard.
heres what th nwt says at gen 10:9.
Earnest:
Just to put you at your ease, I'm not into fights, either.
I, too, enjoy comparing the LXX but am wary of using it as a definitive reference, as some of the translation work is a little ropey.
My difficulty with the NWT Translation Committee, in general, is that it hasn't stuck true to it's mandate.
My only difficulty with the text in question is that it assumes a meaning that we cannot be certain of.
It's one thing to change an interpretation in commentary, quite another to do so within a bible translation.
I'll reiterate that I do concur with that interpretation, just not the translation.
On a lighter note, please feel free to email me, if you wish. It's always nice to contact a fellow Brit.
LT
A plea from a lonely, pregnant woman, to have her hair stroked?
Who could refuse?
Take it easy Wendy, that cupboard is a bit small, the bubble bath was a better option.
How about a little light music?
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Wishing you well on the 17th!