$500.00 cash to the first person who meets the challenge

[_The1Guy]

John is trying to warn those of us who come after him, particularly in the latter days as certain things come to pass. And, yes, the time span is long for us mortals but very short in Divine terms.

[Guest]

...

[_Bret Ripley]

Basically, its money ...That's basically the idea The1Guy pitches in his novel. 666 was Solomon's income one year, so the capitalist system that generated Solomon's money is the beast. Or something.

No, the beast is not money. If you would simply read at least the appendix of the book, you wouldn't have to say, "Or something."

Dude, you have dishonestly combined a quotation from Mktavish with one of my own. I did not write "Basically, its money." I have your book and I read the appendix. If you will read what I actually wrote, you will see I indicated that you identified the beast with a system (not the money itself).

There is a side by side verse by verse explanation in the paperback edition that normally sells for $9.99 plus shipping. But I am sure you are not interested, if you won't even read the free digital version.

I have the free digital version.

I have just read J.P. Garrow's book that you refer to; if it is typical of all the author's in the past, they all have holes in their interpretations because they simply don't see what John saw. John is relating a vision that reveals the future not his current time-frame or past but a time-frame ushering in the Second Coming in the future.

John is writing of things that "must soon come to pass". He is most certainly extrapolating from events of his own times to write of his immediate future. One of the things that confuses modern audiences is his chosen genre: apocalyptic. Apocalyptic literature typically describes current situations and expectations using symbols that are identifiable to the original audience, and then describe some future cataclysm in which things get sorted out. By employing symbols, John is simply using tools that are typical to the apocalyptic genre.

A fundamental misunderstanding of the apocalyptic genre is one of reasons modern folks mistakenly believe that Revelation specifically refers to events in our future. John knew precisely what he was writing about, and his immediate audience understood his meaning. To try to make Revelation say something specifically about today is to violate at least one fundamental rule of exegesis and to disrespect the text, the author, and his audience.

[_Nightlion]

Is that the best you can do? Read the book! And then we can discuss what John is telling us. We don't have much time left.

If it's so urgent can Bret forward me a digital copy of the Book? Can You?

[_Nightlion]

A fundamental misunderstanding of the apocalyptic genre is one of reasons modern folks mistakenly believe that Revelation specifically refers to events in our future. John knew precisely what he was writing about, and his immediate audience understood his meaning. To try to make Revelation say something specifically about today is to violate at least one fundamental rule of exegesis and to disrespect the text, the author, and his audience.

How do you figure that? No Celestial Cube has descended already with twelve foundations lit by the Light of Christ. Satan has not YET been bound for a thousand years. None of the plagues have occurred. Neither has Satan been loosed after having been bound. There has been no suspension of men denying God. So man cannot begin again to deny their God.

Counting backward from all those events which are obviously in OUR future, where do we draw the line for what John regards as current, like the seven churches, and what IS future like this earth docking with the gigantic Capital of the Universe city?

[_Bret Ripley]

Is that the best you can do? Read the book! And then we can discuss what John is telling us. We don't have much time left.

If it's so urgent can Bret forward me a digital copy of the Book? Can You?

I would be happy to do so, Nightlion, with the permission of the author. What say you, The1Guy?

[_Nightlion]

If it's so urgent can Bret forward me a digital copy of the Book? Can You?

I would be happy to do so, Nightlion, with the permission of the author. What say you, The1Guy?

As I once mistakenly attributed to James Cagney when it was in fact Edward G. Robinson::::::::

Yeah, see, now gimmie!

From Key Largo

[_Bret Ripley]

A fundamental misunderstanding of the apocalyptic genre is one of reasons modern folks mistakenly believe that Revelation specifically refers to events in our future. John knew precisely what he was writing about, and his immediate audience understood his meaning. To try to make Revelation say something specifically about today is to violate at least one fundamental rule of exegesis and to disrespect the text, the author, and his audience.

How do you figure that? No Celestial Cube has descended already with twelve foundations lit by the Light of Christ. Satan has not YET been bound for a thousand years. None of the plagues have occurred. Neither has Satan been loosed after having been bound. There has been no suspension of men denying God. So man cannot begin again to deny their God.

There are at least a couple of ways to approach your question.

First approach: given John's chosen genre (apocalyptic), did he really expect these things (either literally or as symbolically portrayed) to come to pass? Or was he simply being true to the apocalyptic genre, and sending out a message of hope to his brothers and sisters who were being oppressed by Rome that God would triumph in the end?

Second approach: John did expect something big to happen, and was simply wrong.

Counting backward from all those events which are obviously in OUR future, where do we draw the line for what John regards as current, like the seven churches, and what IS future like this earth docking with the gigantic Capital of the Universe city?

Given the nature of the apocalyptic genre, it isn't even clear that John was making any specific predictions about what we would regards as literal, historical events. With either of the scenarios I have described above, there is no reason to suppose that anything John wrote is yet to come to pass.

[_Bret Ripley]

Edward G. Robinson::::::::

Yeah, see, now gimmie!

From Key Largo

Classic!

[_Nightlion]

How do you figure that? No Celestial Cube has descended already with twelve foundations lit by the Light of Christ. Satan has not YET been bound for a thousand years. None of the plagues have occurred. Neither has Satan been loosed after having been bound. There has been no suspension of men denying God. So man cannot begin again to deny their God.

There are at least a couple of ways to approach your question.

First approach: given John's chosen genre (apocalyptic), did he really expect these things (either literally or as symbolically portrayed) to come to pass? Or was he simply being true to the apocalyptic genre, and sending out a message of hope to his brothers and sisters who were being oppressed by Rome that God would triumph in the end?

Second approach: John did expect something big to happen, and was simply wrong.

Counting backward from all those events which are obviously in OUR future, where do we draw the line for what John regards as current, like the seven churches, and what IS future like this earth docking with the gigantic Capital of the Universe city?

Given the nature of the apocalyptic genre, it isn't even clear that John was making any specific predictions about what we would regards as literal, historical events. With either of the scenarios I have described above, there is no reason to suppose that anything John wrote is yet to come to pass.

Ahh, exegesis by finesse.