Apologia Podcast

GodKillzYou · 12-08-2009 12:02:06

Recently, mistakenly or not, I've invited some Jehovah's Witnesses to my place each Sunday to discuss the Bible and Christianity. The first time they came to my door I engaged them in conversation, and was willing to entertain their ideas about the Bible and whatnot.

In their attempts to persuade me, their main focus has been on the book of Revelation. Specifically, chapter 17, where it talks about Babylon and the woman sitting on the beast. They claim that this is speaking of Rome and the modern Christian church, and that we are living in the end times.

To make a long story short, this seems to me to be a non-sequitur. Setting aside the fact that the imagery in Revelation could be interpreted in an infinite number of ways, even if this chapter was talking specifically about Rome or the modern church, it doesn't mean that the entire Bible is true. I tried to get this point across, but they were stuck on the "accuracy" of this image.

If anyone has more insight into this chapter of Revelation, or the arguments I'm talking about here, I'd greatly appreciate the input. I've read the book of Revelation, and it's so obscure as to wonder if the man who wrote is wasn't on drugs.

It just seems as though you could treat the book of Revelation as you could any of Nostradamus' writings. Just make it fit any particular event you wanted to.

Pete · 02-16-2010 13:28:52

Chapter 17 is about the only part of Revelation that I can understand. The woman does seem to represent Rome. Verse 18: "the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth." At the time Revelation was written, that city was of course Rome. Verse 9: the woman sits on 7 mountains; Rome sits on 7 hills. According to Bob Price, ancient Christians referred euphemistically to Rome as "Babylon."

However, saying that the woman also represents the modern Christian church strains all credulity. Does the modern Christian church reign over the kings of the earth? Is the modern Christian church drunk with the blood of saints and martyrs (verse 6)? It's just a transparent attempt to force an ancient diatribe against pagan Rome to have relevance in the modern world.

If anything, the fact that the woman represents Rome refutes the idea that Revelation says anything about our time. Revelation 1:1 says that the things in the book must shortly come to pass. Rev 1:3 says the time is at hand. So the author of Revelation and his audience also thought that they were living in the end times. That was 2,000 years ago. So much for accuracy.

greenlion · 06-04-2010 15:02:12

Ask them to predict something definite based on the "revelations" in Revelation. What they are doing is retrodicting, which is meaningless unless enough detail is provided that it could not just be confirmation bias.

Last edited by greenlion (06-04-2010 15:15:32)

Apologia Podcast

Apologia Forum

#1 12-08-2009 12:02:06

Revelation As Proof Of God's Word?

Sorry. You have to be registered to access this content.

Sorry. You have to be registered to access this content.

Sorry. You have to be registered to access this content.

#2 02-16-2010 13:28:52

Re: Revelation As Proof Of God's Word?

#3 06-04-2010 15:02:12

Re: Revelation As Proof Of God's Word?

Forum Tools

Most Active Users

Board information

Main Menu

Podcasts We Like

Login Form

Resources

Who's Online

Latest Forum Posts

Participants

Guests

GodKillzYou Member	Revelation As Proof Of God's Word? Recently, mistakenly or not, I've invited some Jehovah's Witnesses to my place each Sunday to discuss the Bible and Christianity. The first time they came to my door I engaged them in conversation, and was willing to entertain their ideas about the Bible and whatnot. In their attempts to persuade me, their main focus has been on the book of Revelation. Specifically, chapter 17, where it talks about Babylon and the woman sitting on the beast. They claim that this is speaking of Rome and the modern Christian church, and that we are living in the end times. To make a long story short, this seems to me to be a non-sequitur. Setting aside the fact that the imagery in Revelation could be interpreted in an infinite number of ways, even if this chapter was talking specifically about Rome or the modern church, it doesn't mean that the entire Bible is true. I tried to get this point across, but they were stuck on the "accuracy" of this image. If anyone has more insight into this chapter of Revelation, or the arguments I'm talking about here, I'd greatly appreciate the input. I've read the book of Revelation, and it's so obscure as to wonder if the man who wrote is wasn't on drugs. It just seems as though you could treat the book of Revelation as you could any of Nostradamus' writings. Just make it fit any particular event you wanted to.
	For some strange reason I can't update my profile, so here's some info about me... My blog: Sorry. You have to be registered to access this content. Facebook: Sorry. You have to be registered to access this content. Twitter: Sorry. You have to be registered to access this content.

Pete New member	Re: Revelation As Proof Of God's Word? Chapter 17 is about the only part of Revelation that I can understand. The woman does seem to represent Rome. Verse 18: "the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth." At the time Revelation was written, that city was of course Rome. Verse 9: the woman sits on 7 mountains; Rome sits on 7 hills. According to Bob Price, ancient Christians referred euphemistically to Rome as "Babylon." However, saying that the woman also represents the modern Christian church strains all credulity. Does the modern Christian church reign over the kings of the earth? Is the modern Christian church drunk with the blood of saints and martyrs (verse 6)? It's just a transparent attempt to force an ancient diatribe against pagan Rome to have relevance in the modern world. If anything, the fact that the woman represents Rome refutes the idea that Revelation says anything about our time. Revelation 1:1 says that the things in the book must shortly come to pass. Rev 1:3 says the time is at hand. So the author of Revelation and his audience also thought that they were living in the end times. That was 2,000 years ago. So much for accuracy.

greenlion New member	Re: Revelation As Proof Of God's Word? Ask them to predict something definite based on the "revelations" in Revelation. What they are doing is retrodicting, which is meaningless unless enough detail is provided that it could not just be confirmation bias. Last edited by greenlion (06-04-2010 15:15:32)