Book of Revelation

Post Reply New Topic

Anybody here have in interest in this subject or biblical prophesies. I do, even though I am an athiest.

I tend to have a historic view on it, meaning that I believe it to be more or less war propaganda at the height of the Roman persecution of the Christians. But I want to know what you think.....


The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse

"And I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals, and I heard, as it were the noise of thunder, one of the four beasts saying, Come and see.

And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.

And when he had opened the second seal, I heard the second beast say, Come and see.

And there went out another horse that was red: and power was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another: and there was given unto him a great sword.

And when he had opened the third seal, I heard the third beast say, Come and see.

And I beheld, and lo a black horse; and he that sat on him had a pair of balances in his hand.

And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts say, A measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny; and see thou hurt not the oil and the wine.

And when he had opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth beast say, Come and see.

And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth."

--Revelation, verses 1-8.


The Antichrist

"Don't let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God's temple, proclaiming himself to be God"

--Thessalonians 2:1-4

I think, from reading Revelations, that John of Patmos must've partaken of some pretty strong hallucinogens.....

Biblical prophecy is indeed a fascinating area. With regard to Revelation, Hyperborealian (are you from beyond the North Wind?) is right about an anti-Roman element; I believe "Mystery, Babylon the Great, mother of the harlots and abominations of the earth," drunk with the blood of the saints and having a cup of abominations full of the filthiness of fornication committed with the kings of the earth and riding upon a beast with seven heads, is frequently identified with Rome. I am doubtful whether John himself was advocating an armed uprising against Rome, though others certainly had done so and were to do so again. And certainly much of the language is militaristic. Have you read much of Isaiah, Ezekiel or Daniel? Also Enoch? (this last one, or rather many as there are more volumes than one, I think, not really Biblical, but pseudepigraphical - not even included in the Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical works).

And very funny, Quartermass! The style apparently differs markedly from that of the Gospel According to John and the three epistles (letters) of John, leading scholars to speculate as to the identity of John of Patmos (frequently called "the Divine") or not with John the Evangelist (in this context, author of the Gospel rather thann proclaimer thereof, from euangelion, approximately "good message" hence Anglo-Saxon equivalent god-spell, gospel). It (Revelation) was traditionally believed to be written in John's old age. Then again, the difference of style has been pointed to as evidence of angelic dictation.

Just the writings of man, like the rest of the Bible. This guy was just a crack addict to boot.

Do you have evidence of cocaine use? I thought coca was indigenous to the Americas. If you're going to accuse someone posthumously of substance abuse, at least make it something accessible in that part of the world at that time, like opium poppies or hashish (uncertain about latter at that precise time).

Also the use of the apocalyptic genre or any other form of prophetic writing hardly constitutes evidence of halucinogens, narcotics or other mind altering substances. It is intended to be cryptic (if Hyperborealian is correct about anti-Roman war-propaganda, being cryptic would have made eminent sense if you choose to discard divine revelation as a possibility. Openly saying, "Let's overthrow the Roman Empire!" might not be that bright. THAT would constitute evidence of substance abuse. (Sorry about that - just insulted Bar Kokhba and Massada).

That said, further interpretation of Biblical prophecies in the light of your hypothesis might be appreciated... in another thread.

john wrote it...john who? who was that guy? there is no story of him,or people that knew him....seems like an idea,of how things will happen and they are happening now because of that same very idea,part of an agenda coming true,because coincidence its too much to call it...the evil man could have wrote it and put it in the bible,after all the bible is highly corrupted and the original scriptures dont exist anymore.

these evil wicked men that do those kind of stuff,the royal blood,families that have been rich for hundreds of years,into all kinds of wickedness,they do have lots of hope,thats why they get things done...remember to do something first u have to WANT(make your brain move the body the way u want) to do it,its not magic,just hope and confidence.

God knows better

peace

I thought historians suggest Nero was the beast in the book of Revelations? The Romans were in charge at the time the book was written. The writing was understood at the time to the followers to refer to the Rome's oppression of Christians.

Interesting post, though I am not sure that I have followed all of it. Are you saying that a member of one of the various royal families in the world (admittedly many of which have outstanding examples of human evil in them) is responsible for the insertion of the Book of Raevelation? I doubt it. If anything much of it seems to be opposed to the ruling authorities. The reverse of your hypothesis may be true. I believe the Emperor Constantine, the first "Christian" Emperor may have been opposed to its inclusion in the New Testament given the anti-Roman material. And there ARE stories about John. Scholars just are not certain whether it was the same John who wrote Revelation. This was NOT John the Baptist, who had been beheaded beforehand. Actually both John the Baptist, John the Evangelist and (if different from the latter) John of Patmos would have been Yohannan. Alternatively, this could be rendered Ioannes, Johan, Ivan, Ian Giovanni, Juan, Jean or John. Sorry about the tangent.

peace.

yeah,thats what it makes it non-trustable,who is that john...

im saying that they could have made up revelations because people see it happen and they give up and say " ok dude,the end is coming,lets wait for jesus,dont do anything" and while the world burns they do nothing,thats their belief,of being saved by someone and they dont have to do anything.so creating revelations was a trick from the evil people in that sence.

maybe it could have been someone religious,that maybe took drugs too,we dont know,so he wrote and wrote the worst case scenario with a glorious ending,AND the evil people of today took advantage and its imitating it to make people fall in the idea of a "savior",like "the mark on the hand,cant buy or sell without it" they are making the VERICHIP already,go google it or youtube it,and things like that can be happening that way too...

as the time passes by the truths are coming closer to us,i have seen humans know more than ever and thanks to the internet and other people who research we know more,so its a matter of time,the truth always comes.

in the meantime, express yourself.

peace

Many Christians feel the book of James was not divinely inspired either. Becasue it has many things in conflcit with Jesus's teaching.

Paul had more in conflict with Jesus than did James. James was Jesus' brother... there was a lot of conflict between the Jamesian chuch and Paul's mission, and many of Paul's barbs against "the legalists" were actually directed toward James. A good book about this is "James the Brother of Jesus."

Like the German reformer Martin Luther, with his "epistle of straw" nonsense? But there is much good matter in James, like the statement about those who are only hearers and not doers fo the Word being like people who look at themselves in the mirror, walk away and immediately forget what they look like (paraphrasing only slightly here). I would have said less a case of conflict with Jesus' teaching, more a difference of emphasis from Paul in their "take" on Jesus' teaching in terms of say the weight given to faith and works, though both clearly teach both. No offense to either man, despite past arguments in my head with Paul. And despite Luther's anti-Semitism, I am not writing off everything he taught - he had some good ideas. But there were other reformers. Sorry, it was I who raised the issue of Luther - he was the first that came to mind in terms of opponents of James. Is this thread not supposed to be about Revelation? - though diversions can be interesting.

Thank you for this information.

I think another interpretation that I find interesting as well is that the Revelation may also be a socio-political statement for both their present state and future generations.

Stuff like "False Prophets", the role of the Antichrist, the mark, etc. has also been believed to have been a warning to future generations, as the book can be applied to any event at any time in history.

"False Prophets" can refer to people in society who lie or are corrupt and use religion to horde in money, such as the arch-bishops and kings during the middle-ages. It can also apply to priests who are convicted of sex-offenses in the modern age.

"Antichrist" can refer to people who are tyrants. These people, especially in the 20th centuries, are known to cause widespread destruction and portray themselves as divine entities.

And other symbols too have been believed to serve as a warning for future generations.

Hi everyone
I answered to those theories in War is over topic upside if anyone 's interested.
friendly regarding
Eric

A likely candidate. Actually, Hyperborealian's comment about Revelation applying to different generations has a large measure of truth in it. Also, which of the beasts? There were a few that I recall in Revelation. Presumably one of the evil ones and not the "four living creatures" (a different Greek word is used there anyway, zoas or something similar rather than therion). But this still leaves quite a few evil beasts. The Dragon appears to be simply a representation of Satan. There are a number of different beasts invested with the dragon's authority. There was one that came out from the sea which seemed to be a composite creature, which had one of its heads wounded then healed, an image of that beast, I have a feeling there is another beast as well. Then there's the harlot of Babylon's steed. There's also a false prophet (admittedly arguably not a beast). Interestingly at one point the seven headed, ten horned beast (quite similar to the dragon) appears to be associated with different rulers (I think seven heads may just have been identified internally as seven hills - Rome - but the ten horns as ten rulers who at one point are actually at war with Babylon, mother of harlots and abominations of the earth, which is confusing. And there are all these names of blasphemy written on the heads. And is the Beast itself supposed to be an eleventh king? Please correct any errors.