Originally posted by FMFStill no evidence of conspiracy within the book of Revelation, I noticed.
This much is absolutely clear.
So why should I care for your accusations that the proper deceision was to exclude it ?
Other than irrational political prejudice on your own part I see none.
=========================
Does Revelation encourage Mary worship?
Does Revelation state that Rome is the Mother Church?
Does Revelation put in a plug of some kind for the Pope?
Does Revelation lean toward the Latin language over the Greek language?
Does Revelation say anything about Eastern Christianity or Western Christianity?
Does Revelation mention cardinals, bishops, or any other Catholic hierarchical position?
Which political form of government does Revelation push ???
Which church Council does Revelation site as its God ordained authority ?
Where is there a word in Revelation attacking Greek Orthodoxy explicitly?
=============================
Originally posted by jaywillThese are all strawmen.
FMF,
Does Revelation encourage Mary worship?
Does Revelation state that Rome is the Mother Church?
Does Revelation put in a plug of some kind for the Pope?
Does Revelation lean toward the Latin language over the Greek language?
Does Revelation say anything about Eastern Christianity or Western Christianity?
Does Revelation mention c ...[text shortened]... ained authority ?
Where is there a word in Revelation attacking Greek Orthodoxy explicitly?
I have not made these assertions, as you well know.
Originally posted by FMFOkay, I'll erase the sarcasm.
Very cute.
It's not always possible for me to be at my computer to answer you instantly.
But, be my guest, do your best to score a cheap, irrelevant point.
The points I am about to "score" will not be "cheap."
I am going to show that the book of Revelation is by far a more penetrating critic of dead religion than you could be. But I will also show the remedy and the way out.
Tomorrow I will begin to post "The Case Against Corrupt Religious Institutions of ANY Kind in the book of Revelation"
The seekers of the truth I think will thank God that this book was included in the New Testament as it is divinely inspired.
I am tired of beating around the bush.
Originally posted by jaywillPlease don't bother.
The points I am about to "score" will not be "cheap."
I am going to show that the book of [b]Revelation is by far a more penetrating critic of dead religion than you could be. But I will also show the remedy and the way out.[/b]
Youn have made your case crystal clear, even more so on the other thread.
Please do not repeat yourself here, because I have no intention of typing out all my points again. You have not understood - or wanted to understand - a single one of them.
And now as you descend into strawmen and cheap shots, I am not going to rspond to any more of your long long long text analyses.
I have read the Book. The Book is what it is because the authors made it what it is. They were not stupid. And I am not stupid. I cannot process any more regurgitations from you of what they wrote.
Please do not bother.
I just read through the other thread again, and you showed no interest in venturing beyond the self-validating parts of the book whose validation is so controversial. Don't bother showing me anything.
Originally posted by jaywillIt isn't divinely inspired. An d no quote from the book itself proves that it is. Do not post "The Case Against Corrupt Religious Institutions of ANY Kind in the book of Revelation" on my account. I am no longer interested. The long list of things I didn't say presumably about to be knocked down by you...
Tomorrow I will begin to post [b] "The Case Against Corrupt Religious Institutions of ANY Kind in the book of Revelation"
The seekers of the truth I think will thank God that this book was included in the New Testament as it is divinely inspired.
I am tired of beating around the bush.[/b]
Does Revelation encourage Mary worship? Does Revelation state that Rome is the Mother Church? Does Revelation put in a plug of some kind for the Pope? Does Revelation lean toward the Latin language over the Greek language? Does Revelation say anything about Eastern Christianity or Western Christianity? Does Revelation mention cardinals, bishops, or any other Catholic hierarchical position? Which political form of government does Revelation push ??? Which church Council does Revelation site as its God ordained authority ? Where is there a word in Revelation attacking Greek Orthodoxy explicitly?
...was the last straw.
Originally posted by FMFRest assured that I would not do it on your acount.
It isn't divinely inspired. An d no quote from the book itself proves that it is. Do not post [b] "The Case Against Corrupt Religious Institutions of ANY Kind in the book of Revelation" on my account. I am no longer interested. The long list of things I didn't say presumably about to be knocked down by you...Does Revelation encourage Mary worship ...[text shortened]... a word in Revelation attacking Greek Orthodoxy explicitly?
...was the last straw.[/b]
And other than accusations which seem more to reveal your own personal jealousy (I suppose) I see no evidence in Revelation that it had any advantagous benefit to Eastern or Western branch of Christiandom. And your failure to prove it is cloaked in an attempt to portray the request as a strawman argument.
This is a spiritual battle and not a political one. But I will not be writing anything more on this discussion for your sake.
This is not intended for FMF.
In Revelation chapters 2 and 3 there are seven letters to seven churches. It should be evident to the casual reader that nothing negative about the church life escapes the eyes of Jesus. Only one of the seven churches is only praised - Philadelphia (Rev. 3:7-13).
We might say that the church in Smyrna (2:8-11) is perhaps neither rebuked. All the rest, Ephesus, Pergamos, Thytira, Sardis, and Laodicea are exhorted, rebuked. Yet these rebukes are not merely for the gloating over what is nagative. They are with a view to adjust and correct the defective situation in that church.
These letters should be regarded as cases to cover all manner of spiritual deviation throughout the entire church history. Indeed some expositors write, and I agree, that the seven letters to the seven churches are a prophecy of the development of the Christian church throughout the church age until the time of Christ's second coming.
But if this approach is not taken the letters were still descriptions of the situation of actual churches existing at the time the epistle was written.
The eyes of Christ are discribed as a flame of fire. And out of His mouth proceeds a sharp two edge sword.
Nothing in the church is hidden from His burning and penetrating eyes.
"... and all the churches will know that I am He who searches the inward parts and the hearts ..." (2:24)
And with the two edged sword of His word what He sees worthy of judgment He pronounces judgment against. The sword of His word is the cut out of the church the unworthy things.
Christ is seen as a high priest walking amidst the churches supplying them with oil (the Holy Spirit) and trimming their lampstands, that they may shine brightly. Just as the priest in the temple cared for the shining lamps of fire so Christ is trimming the wicks and tending to the brightness of His churches.
Originally posted by jaywillI am not jealous of you jaywill.
And other than accusations which seem more to reveal your own personal jealousy (I suppose) I see no evidence in [b] Revelation that it had any advantagous benefit to Eastern or Western branch of Christiandom. And your failure to prove it is cloaked in an attempt to portray the request as a strawman argument.[/b]
And it isn't a spiritual battle. It's about a book being an imposter: that's a mundane issue, in the literal sense of the word 'mundane'.
The problem is with you.
I have now realized that the whole discussion we had before has been apparently been wiped from your memory. You come at this with the premise that you will repeat yourself in great detail. And nothing I have said previously is acknowledged. leaving me with the task of retyping long explanations and arguments that you failed to address the first time around.
Your Question/Rant:
Does Revelation encourage Mary worship? Does Revelation state that Rome is the Mother Church? Does Revelation put in a plug of some kind for the Pope? Does Revelation lean toward the Latin language over the Greek language? Does Revelation say anything about Eastern Christianity or Western Christianity? Does Revelation mention cardinals, bishops, or any other Catholic hierarchical position? Which political form of government does Revelation push ??? Which church Council does Revelation site as its God ordained authority ? Where is there a word in Revelation attacking Greek Orthodoxy explicitly?
...made me suddenly realize that you seem not to have read anything I wrote in that last thread and/or didn't understand it if you did and/or are pretending to have forgotten so that I will baulk at the prospect of having to go through it all again, and in so doing give up - and you will have won.
You never once ventured beyond self-serving quotes from the book itself.
So I give up.
I don't want to explain it all again. There's a perfectly good Thread there in the archives. I can't be bothered to type it all again.
That is the problem.
Not jealousy. Or anything remotely like it, let me assure you.
Originally posted by FMF=======================
I am not jealous of you jaywill.
And it isn't a spiritual battle. It's about a book being an imposter: that's a mundane issue, in the literal sense of the word 'mundane'.
The problem is with you.
I have now realized that the whole discussion we had before has been apparently been wiped from your memory. You come at this with the premise that you will re That is the problem.
Not jealousy. Or anything remotely like it, let me assure you.
I am not jealous of you jaywill.
=============================
I didn't write that you were jealous of ME.
How about you reading what I wrote?
You say "You didn't read anything I wrote."
I think we've run the course. But I will go back and see these supposed gems of wisdom that I alledgedly didn't read.
I don't recall missing any of your posts. But it is possible.
Originally posted by jaywillI did.
I didn't write that you were jealous of [b]ME.
How about you reading what I wrote?[/b]
And my answer is, I am not jealous of you, jaywill, far from it. What a strange - attempted - personal snub!!!
But I will go back and see these supposed gems of wisdom that I alledgedly didn't read. I don't recall missing any of your posts.
If you'd understood a word I'd said on that other thread, you'd never ever have come up with...
"Does Revelation encourage Mary worship? Does Revelation state that Rome is the Mother Church? Does Revelation put in a plug of some kind for the Pope? Does Revelation lean toward the Latin language over the Greek language? Does Revelation say anything about Eastern Christianity or Western Christianity? Does Revelation mention cardinals, bishops, or any other Catholic hierarchical position? Which political form of government does Revelation push ??? Which church Council does Revelation site as its God ordained authority ? Where is there a word in Revelation attacking Greek Orthodoxy explicitly?"
...which I am going to use on Debates as a case study of "the strawman" for months to come.
I didn't miss this:
FMF wrote
=========================
Now you've started to misrepresent my views by suggesting that I said church leaders did what they did because they were 'taking money from the faithful' and were up to 'dirty tricks'. These are not expressions I have used, as you well know.
Corporatism is corporatism. There are corporate interests. And there are technocrats dedicated to serving them. Corporations consolidate their own power through the control of information and taking control of expertise. It's all very normal. There's no need to try to pretend otherwise by talking of 'dirty tricks' and 'taking money.
===================================
So Revelation was chosen to considate power on behalf of the Western branch of Christianity.
When I asked for evidence of this in the book of Revelation, I only heard crickets churping late into the night.
Okay, on FMF's say so the book is taboo not because of any inherent weakness within it but because someone thought its inclusion in the canon would consolidate corporate religious power.
HOW ????
How ... more so than John or James or Luke or Philemon or 1 and 2 Peter ?
He say corporate turf wars and the desire to consolidate power are the source of the inclusion of Revelation.
I don't see that even if this were true how it makes Revelation not the blessed conclusion to the Bible which it is.
What Revelation does do is make the disciples clear about the final victory of the kingdom of God over the kingdom of Satan. Maybe that is something Satan wants us all to be unclear about. So he hides his final defeat by enfluencing some people to condemn the book of Revelation a the product of corporate power struggle.
I think the ancient brothers, who ever they may have been, made the right choice to recognize the apostolic authorship and divine inspiration of this book.