While doing some research on Gorbachev, I saw this article and found it very interesting.
http://www.access-one.com/prophecy/covenant.htm
Printable View
While doing some research on Gorbachev, I saw this article and found it very interesting.
http://www.access-one.com/prophecy/covenant.htm
.
It seems the Bible is just like Nostradamus... it easy to find there any "prophesy" you like.
Just one quote:
Gorbachev was the EIGHTH leader of the Soviet Union, succeeding Chernenko, Andropov, Brezhnev, Kosygin, Khrushchev, Stalin and Lenin.
If "leader of Soviet Union" means general secretary of CPSU, then Gorbachev was SEVENTH. What does Kosygin do in this list?
With such manipulations, it easy to "prove" anything!
:) That thing is hilarious. Did you actually bother to read the chapter before posting that? The "prince" in that prophecy is the Messiah. So to believe this prophecy came true you must believe that Mikhail Gorbachev is Yahweh.
The "for a 7" part means for a week, not for "some quantity of time equalling divisible by 7." This site is not only idiotic, it's intellectually dishonest.Quote:
Close examination reveals that this gesture met all of the criteria of Daniel's prophecy which stated that a "prince" would come "after 69 weeks" and make a "strong and firm covenant with the many for a 7." The period of time of this covenant on the Hebrew/Jewish calendar is exactly 7 months - from Nisan 17 to Heshvan 17.
BTW my birthday is 9 months to the date after John Lennon was shot. I must be a reincarnation! Alert the authorities of this website immediately!
.
ok ok! :lol: I just wanted to see what everyone would say.
Pravit, have you ever read Umberto Eco? Esp. "Foucault's Pendulum"? :) Maybe too eraly, but I think you will like it :)
Well, watching Noodled Ragu and Beef Stroganoff go at it on TV was quite amusing, even as a child.
What old Beef Stroganoff is up to today, I really don't care.
I herd that he converted to Russian Orthodox though.
Religious people ( particularly Christians, Jews, Hindu and Buddhist ) tend to be better behaved then non-religious so I guess that's a plus.
The beast is rather Yeltsin then. Because Kosygin never was the head of state, he was head of government during Brezhnev's time. So Gorbachev was 7th after Lenin, Stalin, Khruschev, Brezhnev, Andropov and Chernenko. Yeltsin was 8th.Quote:
Lastly, Rev. 17:11 says the coming "beast" will be an EIGHTH ruler. Gorbachev was the EIGHTH leader of the Soviet Union, succeeding Chernenko, Andropov, Brezhnev, Kosygin, Khrushchev, Stalin and Lenin. WATCH GORBACHEV! His return to power is certain...and imminent.
By the way, it's not the first time I hear different "biblical tales" about Soviet Union. I heard it's the land of Gog and Magog and so on... And I've seen a lot of americans believing in such tales. Take incompetence, add propaganda and multiply it on religious extremism. You'll get average american. (No offence. I saw wrong people and I'm just wrong :D)
You truly are the King of kings...Quote:
Originally Posted by Pravit
Either that, or you're Mick Jagger
there is another site where the author thinks Putin to be antichrist and that he s going to begin 3d World war - take a look:
http://www.revelation13.net/Russians.html
http://www.revelation13.net/Putin.html
The author is a complete nut! That's where I laugh most of all:Quote:
Originally Posted by Артемида
World, of course, revolves around US and their crisises. :lol:Quote:
Note that one of his political opponents, former Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov, was born on October 31, 1929, the day the U.S. stock market crashed and one of the darkest days of the century; this may indicate Primakov will eventually also have some role in the Russian government under Putin.
Cool transition between russian ОВР and English "over". :lol: I wonder how will author interpret FAR (english variant of ОВР)?Quote:
Primakov's coalition in the Russian parliament was Fatherland-All Russia, or OVR, could that mean "over"? As in "it is over"?
Of course, and God thinks english too. And surname Putin doesn't have Russian roots. :lol:Quote:
Note that, concerning Russian President Vladimir Putin:
--The Englsh name "Putt" means "dweller near a pit or pond".
What I am talking about here is the Antichrist, coming to power in Russia, and that Russia is the red 10-horned beast of the Bible's Book of Revelation (the 10 horns being the Confederation of Independent States, led by Russia, although there are more than 10 in it now).
Primakov's coalition in the Russian parliament was Fatherland-All Russia, or OVR, could that mean "over"? As in "it is over"?
Putin's grandfather was a cook to Lenin and Stalin, and therefore he worked in "Hell's Kitchen".
In Hindu mythology, the female demon Putana was a daughter of Bali, the Monkey King.
No comments.
Hahahahaha! :lol:Quote:
Primakov's coalition in the Russian parliament was Fatherland-All Russia, or OVR, could that mean "over"? As in "it is over"?
Hahahahaha! :lol:Quote:
(the 10 horns being the Confederation of Independent States, led by Russia, although there are more than 10 in it now)
I thought this topic ended ages ago... :?
I'm buying a gas mask and heading for the hills.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pravit
I have read the book and I think about that book everytime I see someone coming with that crazy numerology.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeus
I can prove you anything with my numerology.
"Foucault's Pendulum" is one of the best book I have ever read. Top 5. It is a huge book though. But the final conclusion is superb.
Geesh........Gorby is not the beast. The beast was Emperor Nero(his name's numerical value equals 666). It may interest people in knowing that the second coming of Christ is not going to happen, it's already happened!
I know I'm fascinated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandera
Well gather around and let me tell you :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Линдзи
See....Christ said he would return soon and he did(spiritually speaking). The final judgement and such came in 70AD with the destruction of the Temple in Jersuleum. Nero is identified as the beast, and Revealations predicts his persecutions of the Christians, which did occur.
So basically Christ has already triumphed and we have been living in the kingdom of God for the past 2000 years(which is spiritual, Christ said his kingdom was not of this world). This doesnt mean sin and trouble doesnt exist, but its reign over mankind has been defeated.
This is not some crackpot theory, theres a whole school of thought called Preterism that upholds this view and it was common place among Christians untill the 19th century.
http://www.preterist.org/whatispreterism.asp
Is the End of the World near? Are we living in the Last Days? Is Christ's return at hand? For 150 years here in America we have constantly been told we were living on the threshold of the end of the world and Christ's return. Prediction after prediction has failed to materialize, and false hope after false hope has been foisted upon the Christian community. Many Christians have been disillusioned, and are already looking for more reasonable explanations. Some have been so disillusioned they left the faith altogether. And the secular media (who are always looking for an excuse) are further discrediting Christianity because of it. Something is terribly wrong with traditional views of Bible Prophecy. There is a serious need to re-examine the whole issue of Last Things.
Bible prophecy can be understood, but Futurist views have fallen far short for many reasons: their extreme physical/literalizing approach, their seeming inability to distinguish between figurative and literal language, and their failure to properly take into account the historical-grammatical-cultural context of the prophecies (specifically what they meant to their original audience). Even the most difficult prophetic passage comes alive when approached properly. It is time to look at some alternatives, and the Preterist view is a great place to start.
"Preterist" means past in fulfillment, and "Futurist" means future in fulfillment. Preterist basically means the opposite of Futurist. Futurists believe most end-time prophecies (especially the major ones) are yet to be fulfilled. Preterists believe that most or all of Bible Prophecy has already been fulfilled in Christ and the on-going expansion of His Kingdom. Most Futurists do not really believe Christ has been successful yet in fully establishing His kingdom.
The "Preterist" interpretation of Bible prophecy has been mentioned several times in publications such as Christianity Today, Christian News, Great Christian Books catalog, World Magazine, and several others. There is already at least one daily radio program teaching from the preterist perspective and several monthly and quarterly publications. Scores of preterist books, tracts, video and audio tapes have been produced and many more are on the way. It is beginning to capture significant public attention, and is "spreading like wildfire" at the grass roots level. It is compatible with the essential beliefs of all Christians, and is already represented in nearly all Protestant denominations and the Roman Church.
When will Christ return? This question is relevant, and can be answered by scripture. Jesus seems to have answered it very clearly in these passages (Matt. 10:23; Matt. 16:27,28; Matt. 24:34). Ever wonder why the First Century Christians expected Jesus to come in their lifetime, and where they got this expectation from? Take a look at the extreme sense of imminency in these passages: James 5:8,9; 1 Pet. 4:7; Matt. 10:23; Matt. 16:27,28; Matt. 24:34. These verses have always troubled Bible students, and have been used by liberal theologians to attack the inspiration of Scripture. They reason that these passages were not fulfilled when they were supposed to be (the first century generation), so Jesus and the NT writers failed in their predictions and were therefore not inspired. But these verses point to Christ's coming in some sense in connection with the Fall of Jerusalem at 70 AD. So, Jesus' predictions were fulfilled. He did not fail, nor do we need to engage in theological gymnastics to try to explain-away the seeming delay or postponement of His return. It happened right on schedule. Many knew the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD was important in God's scheme of redemption, but never understood its full significance. It has to do with the consummation of the plan of redemption. The final events of the redemptive drama came to pass in the first century within the apostles' generation (before A.D. 70). Christ's kingdom is here now. Paradise has been restored in Christ (spiritually-speaking). We live in the Garden of Eden now (if we are in Christ), just as sure as we can know we have "eternal life." These are present and abiding benefits, not pie-in-the-sky bye-and-bye. Christ has conquered all His enemies and has given us the Kingdom.
This view offers a much more positive and realistic worldview. It is conservative, consistent, optimistic, responsible and accountable. And it robs us of no motivation for either living the Christian life, or evangelizing the world. In fact, it's the only view which gives us a consistent reason for being constructively involved in making the world a better place for the long-term, unlike the short-term escapist and withdrawal mindset of most futurists.
Bible prophecy absolutely makes sense when approached from this past-fulfillment (preterist) perspective! It puts emphasis on the spiritual nature of God's Kingdom, not on the physical, materialistic, sensual, and sensational. It teaches a realized spiritual salvation in Christ and the Church now, instead of a frustrated hope for a postponed sensually-gratifying paradise way off in the future. It has an optimistic worldview that gets involved, makes a positive difference, and lights a candle, rather than cursing the darkness, longing for a rapture-escape, or retreating from society. It doesn't engage in wild-eyed speculation like futurist views. It's just simple, straight-forward Bible interpretation.
Some of the great theologians and scholars of the last 300 years have suggested the preterist view for consideration, but traditional Christianity was too caught up with the idea that the Pope was the Antichrist or some other such Futurist notion. But that has changed. We are not as gullible now as they were when William Miller, Darby, C. T. Russell, Rutherford, Scofield, Walvoord, and Hal Lindsey came along. A constant barrage of false predictions has made us more wary.
Most Christian theologians in Europe a century ago took a somewhat preterist approach, and none of them considered it unorthodox. One of the leading proponents of the preterist view a century ago was James Stuart Russell (not to be confused with the Jehovah's Witness founder with the same last name, Charles Taze Russell - there is no relation). J. S. Russell (1816-1895) published a book in 1878 entitled, The Parousia. We here at IPA recently reprinted it. Some leading theologians and Christian spokesmen have had the following to say about the book and the preterist view:
F. W. Farrar said Russell's book was "full of suggestiveness."
Charles H. Spurgeon, who did not accept the preterist view, nevertheless stated that Russell's book "throws so much new light upon obscure portions of the Scriptures, and is accompanied with so much critical research and close reasoning, that it can be injurious to none and may be profitable to all."
Walt Hibbard (Chairman, Great Christian Books) "In view of Dr. Russell's marvelous and insightful observations, no serious student of Biblical eschatology should attempt to construct a systematic scheme of apocalyptic events without first consulting this 19th century work, The Parousia."
Gary DeMar (President of American Vision) "How many times have you struggled with the interpretation of certain Biblical texts related to the time of Jesus' return because they did not fit with a preconceived system of eschatology? Russell's Parousia takes the Bible seriously when it tells us of the nearness of Christ's return. Those who claim to interpret the Bible literally, trip over the obvious meaning of these time texts by making Scripture mean the opposite of what it unequivocally declares. Reading Russell is a breath of fresh air in a room filled with smoke and mirror hermeneutics."
Dr. Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr. (Sr. Pastor of Reedy River Presbyterian Church) "Although I do not agree with all the conclusions of J. Stuart Russell's The Parousia, I highly recommend this well-organized, carefully argued, and compellingly written defense of preterism to serious and mature students of the Bible. It is one of the most persuasive and challenging books I have read on the subject of eschatology and has had a great impact on my own thinking. Russell's biblico-theological study of New Testament eschatology sets a standard of excellence."
Dr. R. C. Sproul (Ligonier Ministries) "I believe that Russell's work is one of the most important treatments on Biblical eschatology that is available to the church today. The issues raised in this volume with respect to the time-frame references of the New Testament to the Parousia are vitally important not only for eschatology but for the future debate over the credibility of Sacred Scripture."
Many who never knew anyone else took the preterist view have independently discovered it in the Scriptures, and are finding Biblical prophecy bursting with meaning now. If you haven't taken a look at it, it is time you did. Write or call us here at IPA to obtain some of the books and resources mentioned elsewhere on this web site. These will help you finally make sense out of Bible Prophecy without being taken for a ride by the date-setters
Way to cut and paste. :roll:
Hm. Let's assume for the moment that a)I am convinced of the prophetic nature of the Bible and b)I agree with these people's interpretations of the prophecies. Even so, the evidence surrounding me would suggest that sin's reign over mankind has not been defeated. I have trouble imagining that if sin's power were defeated there'd still be so many infants thrown in dumpsters and gangs shooting the hell out of innocent passers-by and people beating the @@@@ out of their families. And that's just the local news. On this basis I dismiss the theory out of hand. Sorry, bud. This theory sounds like it was cooked up by people who live on the moon. Or possibly in the suburbs.
In a word - stupid. Again, assuming that Jesus was "the Christ" to begin with, you still have to admit that God waited a REALLY EFFING LONG TIME to get around to sending him in the first place. WTF has made or makes any Christians think that he's coming back any time soon?Quote:
For 150 years here in America we have constantly been told we were living on the threshold of the end of the world and Christ's return. Prediction after prediction has failed to materialize, and false hope after false hope has been foisted upon the Christian community. Many Christians have been disillusioned, and are already looking for more reasonable explanations. Some have been so disillusioned they left the faith altogether. And the secular media (who are always looking for an excuse) are further discrediting Christianity because of it.
So "traditional Christianity" doesn't include Catholicism, then. That's...pleasant.Quote:
Some of the great theologians and scholars of the last 300 years have suggested the preterist view for consideration, but traditional Christianity was too caught up with the idea that the Pope was the Antichrist or some other such Futurist notion.
Vaguest. Endorsement. Ever.Quote:
F. W. Farrar said Russell's book was "full of suggestiveness."
Well that is the biggest load of Preterist Catholic bull I ever saw. 70 AD had nothing to do with Gods plan since the temple became obsolete at Christs death. You know,..... when the earthquake happened and the temple veil was torn from TOP to Bottom indicating the end of the temple system. You spout the same bull that the church in Rome spouted after the true Christian church was hijacked by pagan, politics and Rome. They changed the sacred day from Saturday to Sunday and preached that in order to be forgiven they(the people) had to come up with a certain amount of livestock or money to give to the church.
True Christians had already spread up into Britian and into Russia before the Preterist/Pagan Roman church could stop them thoiugh. It is evident that the people living in Russia at that time still held to the original sacred day by the Russian word for Saturday meaning Sabbath, before St Cyrill got there. The church of Rome smashed and destroyed every vestige of the early Christians they could find across Europe. They burned them tortured them and even pushed the last of those holding to the truth, off the cliffs in Switzerland (the Waldensians). Thats rright, pushed them of the cliffs women and babies too. The Pope rejoiced! And what was there crime? They dared to keep and distribute copies of the scriptures. Something that was forbidden by the church under penealty of death. Aparrantly enlightenment was a sin in the churchs version of the KINGDOM OF GOD. The ancient Britons were already Christianized before the popes priests got there too, all the way into Scotland. For over 1200 years the church of Rome suppresed the truth and killed any one who stood in its way, preaching that the church was the Kingdom of God fullfilled. Over 70,000 people were massacred by the church in the "St Bartholomews Massacre" and what did the pope do? He put on his best clothes and had a parade through the streets of Rome to celebrate.
Your preterist theory is so full of holes. You (the Preterist) completely leave out the entire book of Revelations and no wonder since it condenms you and Rome. Why hell, Preterists couldn't make heads or tails out of Revelations. And no, I didn't just swear when I said "hell". God doesn't torture people by continually burning them alive without even the releif of dying, for all eternity. That is another Roman pagan lie along, with Purgatory. The havoc that Rome wrought in the middle ages will be nothing to what is to come and........I'm afraid... your Preterist revival just may be the catalyst to open the door for the real end time when the worlds religions combine into one. And the main religions of the world are already speaking of this and that includes the Pope. Not only that certain priests in Israel are being trained to perform sacrifices again and the Red Heifers are also being bred. Perhaps there will be a Third Temple after all.
It is no wonder that so many people have turned away from God today, they have had such a "fine" example set by our most influential church haha! And most of the protestant churches have not protested very much at all, apparantly. They are not much better.
I would respond to your Catholic-bashing, DDT, except that you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. This preterism goes entirely contrary to Catholic teaching, and has nothing to do with the Church.
If it is "catholoic Bashing" to speak of historical facts, what does that say about thr catholic church? And I'm afraid your knowledge of such things is sadly lacking, you would be nothing short of foolish to try to debate me.
I'm not referring to your use of historical facts, which were few and far between in your tirade. I'm referring to your conflation of preterism and Catholicism. The two have nothing to do with one another. I venture to say that Preterism would fall under the category of heresy according to the Church.Quote:
Originally Posted by DDT
My entire post is factual. If you needed dates I can only conclude you don't know enough on this. As far as preterism goes, modern day preterism has its roots in the doctrines of Catholicism. It goes back to Flavious Josephus's writings to which Eusebious subscribed (a Roman Catholic church father). The apostate church in Rome pretty much had to adopt a preterist attitude in order to justify their own heretical actions. For if the prophecies of Daniel were seen to be in the future at the time of Christ then the Roman church would easily be recognized as a main contender for the title of The BeastQuote:
Originally Posted by Линдзи
Then Magic went on the radio,
And everybody said,
"What a way to go!"
He started out playing mostly rap,
But everybody said,
"Nobody's into that!"
Well they all turned out to be wrong,
'Cause rappin' on the mike had caught on strong!
Some still say it's not what's happenin',
After "Rapper's Delight" went triple platinum!
The record world was in for a smash,
Sugar Hill, Kurtis Blow, and Grandmaster Flash!
Blondie, Stevie Wonder, Tina Marie,
They even made a rapper out of me!
In no time at all, a star was born!
And to think he owes it all to his Magic wand!
Once a jolly swagman camped by a billabong
Under the shade of a coolibar tree.
Three cheers for any sheep rustler who refuses to be taken alive!!
Point Taken Pravit.
Wrong, the Spainish Catholic theologian Alcazar proposed a preterist doctrine in refuting the so-called "historical" theories of Protestants like Luther.Quote:
Originally Posted by Линдзи
There have been preterist thought in Catholicism, sadly the amillienialism of Augustine is whats predominated.
Btw, I am Catholic.
And you'll also noticed I gave my own synopsis and used that site to further explain my viewpoint. So :roll: yourself!Quote:
Originally Posted by Линдзи
As I said before,sin itself has not been eliminated.....but its reign over mankind has. Christ's victory has guaranteed our salvation.....even in the Book of Revealation itself there is no final battle between good and evil because THE BATTLE IS ALREADY OVER!Quote:
and b)I agree with these people's interpretations of the prophecies. Even so, the evidence surrounding me would suggest that sin's reign over mankind has not been defeated. I have trouble imagining that if sin's power were defeated there'd still be so many infants thrown in dumpsters and gangs shooting the hell out of innocent passers-by and people beating the @@@@ out of their families.
Actually thats more true with people who think the world is going to end anytime soon than preterism.Quote:
Sorry, bud. This theory sounds like it was cooked up by people who live on the moon. Or possibly in the suburbs.
Actually thats more true with people who think the world is going to end anytime soon than preterism.[/quote:2jgf62vo]Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandera
You say last week you met the perfect guy
(That's the breaks! That's the breaks!)
And he promised you the stars in the sky
(That's the breaks! That's the breaks!)
He said his Cadillac was gold
(That's the breaks! That's the breaks!)
But he didn't say it was ten years old!
(That's the breaks! That's the breaks!)
He took you out to the Red Coach Grill
(That's the breaks! That's the breaks!)
But he forgot the cash, and you paid the bill!
(That's the breaks! That's the breaks!)
He told you the story of his life!
(That's the breaks! That's the breaks!)
But he forgot the part...about his wife! Huh! Huh!
Just noticed this thread and was slightly astonished. Very curious thing is this Preterism, but, as Lindzy wrote, it doesn't settle the problem of sin (as it is formulated in Christianity). Even if Bandera says "THE BATTLE IS ALREADY OVER" no one — no catholic, no protestant or orthodox — would deny that the situation after the Christ coming has changed and that people nowadays have the possibility of choosing the right way to salvation. But it doesn't intrinsically mean that all are saved by deafult (or the moment they beleive in the historical evidence of Christ, as some of the most odious Protestants say). But if they are not saved and if they don't live in the heaven's kingdom (as far as I see things around me I'm sure they don't), then what is the difference here from Catholic or Orthodox worldvew? The only point is the second coming of Christ. Surely there must be something that marks the transition from this mortal world to the more perfect and immortal one. That is what Christianity is about, and if it is omitted, it is not Christianity then as such.
And there's something ambiguous in this doctrine. It is more honest to adhere to the traditional religion dogmas or to think that all this is about history and psychological and cultural metaphors rather then discard what is not convenient to you from scientifical point of view and to retain what is convenient to you from religious and psychological point of view.
Alright mister.....this is exactly what my Bible(The New American Bible, which is officially used by American Catholics) states clearly in its commentary on the Book of Revealation:Quote:
Originally Posted by Propp
"Though the perspective is eschatological - ultimate salvation and victory are said to take place at the end of the present age when Christ will come in glory at the Parousia - the book presents the decisive struggle of Christ and his followers against Satan and his cohorts as already over."
Im not pulling this out of my ass......almost every scholarly comments on the question agree with this. Even the series Mysteries of the Bible in its episode on Revelation explained this is what seperated the Bible's story from other apocolyptic stories of the era; the battle is described as already over.
Also I have yet to see any commentation stating that Revelation can be seperated from the particular time it was written....the early persecutions of the church. I can even post an article from the Russian Orthodox Church stating this.
So trying to seperate the writing of Revelation from the historical context of Nero's persecutions(Nero is clearly named the Beast) and the destruction of the Temple is by far poor judgement, because most Biblical scholars agree on this.
Then you go against every traditional christian teachings on the question. Even those Christians who deny the Preterist view still maintain that Christ's death and resurrection has given mankind the possibility for salvation. Only Calvinism denies this, since your fate is predermined.Quote:
would deny that the situation after the Christ coming has changed and that people nowadays have the possibility of choosing the right way to salvation.
Also, you need to remember Christ's kingdom is not of this world.....he literally had to drill this into the heads of the Apostles(Mathew and I believe John as well wanted high positions of power in Christ's kingdom).....and yet people still dont understand this. Instead they think Christ's kingdom will be some utopia here on earth......and we've seen where such thinking leads us to(ie schemes like communism). Christ was going against the convention thought of the day, which declared that the Messiah must bring about a physical reign over Israel(and of course hopefully drive out the Romans);in fact this was what the Pharisees accused Jesus of doing and demanded Pilate execute him. Yet Christ made clear to Pilate his kingdom is not of this world, or else his followers would have fought to prevent his arrest. Pilate understood this, the Pharisees did not. And frankly Im going any more with this, cause then it'll degrade into "Who killed Jesus" and "somebody watched the Passion too many times" type nonsense.
What changed was in the spiritual realm not the physical. Christ makes this clear many times.
Im not denying history here, I have yet to read one commentation on Revelation that doesnt speak of the strong influence that historical events like Nero's persecutions and the destruction of the Temple had on its writing. Even those denying the Preterist view agree Revelation must be understood within the context of those historical events, otherwise you're missing much of what the Book is trying to address. Again, if you want I can provide an Orthodox article on the question that backs up much of my view.Quote:
And there's something ambiguous in this doctrine. It is more honest to adhere to the traditional religion dogmas or to think that all this is about history and psychological and cultural metaphors rather then discard what is not convenient to you from scientifical point of view and to retain what is convenient to you from religious and psychological point of view.
It seems our conversation goes like this:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandera
1: "Is this black or white?"
2: "Yes. It is red"
1: "Is this green?"
2: "No, this is green".
:)
By the way, in case you don't know,
"no one would deny..." = "they all agree..."
I also agree with this. Only the question is following — do you beleive 1) it is of supernatural reality and those who will ressurrect from the death will live there for ever or 2) it is psychological idea, like you know, "all people are brothers and sisters, make love not war" etc. But bear in mind that in the second case it won't be Christianity in traditional sence; rather a "J. Christ-oriented thinking" or a kind of modern world-view "with elements of Christian rhetoric".Quote:
Also, you need to remember Christ's kingdom is not of this world.....
I am not a specialist, so I cannot say something for sure, but I think that the Revelation had played a great role in forming the traditional Christian (Orthodox and Catholic) beleife in the afterlife. So it cannot be discarded as "just history" for them. At the same time many of them also agree that many elements of the Revelation are connected with historical facts, that "the beast" is Nero etc. Only the single fact may convey several meanings, I don't remember now who invented the theory of 4 meanings, but he assigned historical, analogical, anagogical (?) and moral meanings to each fact written in the Bible. So it happens that the beast at the same time may be Nero in the Past and Antichrist in the Future.
On the other hand if you say that all that was written in the Revelation is already done then the whole theory of "resurrection and living in the Christ's kingdom ever after" is put in doubt. I don't think that majority of Christians would easily consent to this.
Yes, I believe 'anagogical' is the right term. At least that's the word Dorothy Sayers used in her sublime notes to Dante's even more sublime "Divine Comedy".