Many early Christian did not accept Revelations as true scripture because it contridicted the non-violent teachings of Christ.
Good example of prophecy, ptif Psalm 22 1My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? 6But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people. 7All they that see me laugh me to scorn: they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying, 14I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: (note: Bones pulled from hangin during crucifixion but not broken) 16For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet. 17I may tell all my bones: they look and stare upon me. 18They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture. Margot, you're a stubborn woman!! Tsk, Tsk...
It means that compared to God, man is unworthy.. Crucifixion was common... and the victims clothes were always taken,
The only uncommon thing that happened to Christ, was the crown of thorns and the purple robes they made him wear
And some of the exact words quoted by Christ while suffering on the cross, and the dividing of his garments, etc....oh yeah, He knew the right words to say from His studies of the Psalms, and found a good time to use them; as well as his disciples conspired with the 'clothes scripture' etc...your a self-blinded, gal!
The history of crucifixion can be traced back to the Egyptians (Genesis 40:19) and the Persians (Esther 7:10). It was also practiced by the Assyrians, Scythians, Indians, Germans, and from the earliest times by the Greeks and the Romans. Alexander the Great, after the conquest of Tyre, had two thousand Tyrians crucified as punishment for their resistance. Crucifixion was a punishment that was only for slaves or malefactors of the worst kind and Roman citizens were exempt from it. If the Jews used this manner for punishment, it was usually done after the death. In other words, the body or the head was tied to a stake and therefore, placing the head on a pole after death was also called crucifixion. From the earliest accounts of the history of crucifixion, it was considered the most horrible form of death. To the Jew, it would seem even more horrible because of the curse. "You must not leave his body on the tree overnight. Be sure to bury him that same day, because anyone who is hung on a tree is under God's curse. You must not desecrate the land the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance" (Deuteronomy 21:23). http://www.allaboutjesuschrist.org/history-of-crucifixion-faq.htm
There were variations of crucifixions carried out by the Romanians as well. Vlad Dracula would impale people on giant spikes and leave them lining the road to his capital.
Its a cry of anguish from King David ... a description of the sorrows and sufferings of David the king of Israel. Remember.. David wasn't llowed to build the Temple because he had blood on his hands.
This sounds like Doubting Thomas, or rather, Margot: Luke 16 23And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. 24And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. 25But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. 26And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence. 27Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: 28For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. 29Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. 30And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. 31And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead. Your "Stinkology' is lacking, Margot!
Jesus was called a son of David, and David was operating at times in Psalms as a prophet! Shall we get into the suffering servant and the beard plucking in Isaiah?!! Man, you're dense!
Plus there is the fact that King David might have not existed.....There are no records of any kind, outside of the bible that mention David's name.
It's like trying to tell a man 'blind from birth' what color is, and have him argue with me about it!!! Frustrating.....better leave this thread B4 I lose it....
it's said when he comes again he will be much different .... http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation 19:11-16&version=KJV 11And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. 12His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. 13And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. 14And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. 15And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. 16And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
Typology!!!! But you still dont get it--is it a case of 'old dog/new tricks?" Gone>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It depends. The songs of the suffering servant are four poems written about a certain "servant of YHWH." God calls the servant to lead the nations, but the servant is horribly abused. The servant sacrifices himself, accepting the punishment due others. In the end, he is rewarded. The traditional Jewish interpretation is that the Servant is a metaphor for the Jewish people. The first chapters od Isaiah prophesy doom for a sinful Judah and for all the nations of the world that oppose God, while the last chapters prophesy the restoration of the nation of Israel and a new creation in God's glorious future kingdom.
My last time (altho on deaf ears): Typology. I discovered this for myself years ago, noticing all the similarities in scripture, but later stumbled across the name..as in 'types' of events. The way typology works, is that God gives the 'pointing' event in the physical as a 'type of the 'actual' event to occur in the future in the spiritual. The most obvious is Abraham, the father, sacrificing his only son (of the promise)..but was not 'allowed' to by God, as it could not be the actual event but pointed to the spiritual event of God the Father sacrificing His Son...which was spiritually significant. There are many more such in scripture (such as the 7 OT feasts are types of the NT church events, like Passover, Pentecost (1st fruits) etc.)---1st the 'physical,' and then the 'spiritual.' Just as Nero/Hitler et all are 'types' of antichrists (persecuting both NT Christians and OT Jews), the actual end-time Antichrist is still coming to fulfill his purposes in the spiritual realm, including 'making war with believers,' as prophesied. Again, knowing how stubborn you are and not open to spiritual revelation, my words will fall on your deaf ears..I'm done! EDIT: And No, Scofield didnt teach me that--I get my stuff straight from the H.S.!! (You want His phone number?)
Did they scratch out the bit about Christ with a whip as well? Really there is nothing in Revelation that is all that new. It is simply a retelling of Old Testament prophecies with a few new twists.
OT Book of Daniel correlates with NT Book of Revelation...but it's hopeless in explaining...where's the fork?!! I'm done for the day..have fun kiddies.
I have noticed that some when they can't understand something in the Bible they spiritualize it away. But the interesting thing about the book of Revelation is the name......it is a revelation. This means it's purpose is to reveal things not hide or obscure.
Also, certain part of the book of Mathew.....the part where Jesus was telling His disciples about not letting anyone deceive them and so on. Most of what is mentioned in Revelation has already happened……but there is one Empire that is yet to come, which not a new Empire but a resurrection of an old Empire……the Roman Empire. When Jesus was born and after He ascended to Heaven the Roman Empire was the world ruling Empire. The Roman Empire is not around today, but it will be, because it is that same Empire that Jesus will crush at His second coming……so we should be looking and watching for a resurrection of the so-called holy Roman Empire.
Many modern scholars do not share this view . Increasingly it is believed it was written by a person who was a Westernised and Hellenistic Christian ,writing in Greek , and , being a follower and best "friend "of Jesus , it supported peaceful coexistence with Rome and the opening of the movement to Romans , within the umbrella of all Gentiles . But at this stage Jesus was not head of a unified Christian movement . To the contrary , the Eastern Christian faction writing in Hebrew , chose to fight Rome ( the Zealots) and did not want the movement open to Gentiles . Revelations was essentially John of Zebedee writing from Patmos on behalf of Jesus and in the first part giving letters to the seven churches of Asia , conveying his will concerning the different problems , moral and doctrinal , that faced them . As for being some magical book about the future and a second coming -- shades of the later Nostradamus and the way his writings have been misjudged and trashed.