Jenn6162

Beast out of the Sea, means that it comes out of the people.
There are many instances in the Bible where sea is symbolic of people.

"The wicked are like the troubled sea, when it cannot rest, whose waters cast up mire and dirt." Isaiah 57:20


It is a metaphor. It is in Rev 17 and explained in Rev 17:7. And it is also found in Daniel 7, and explained in Daniel 7:15.

Rev 17:1 One of the seven angels who had poured out the seven bowls came over and spoke to me. "Come with me," he said, "and I will show you the judgment that is going to come on the great prostitute, who sits on many waters.
Rev 17:2 The rulers of the world have had immoral relations with her, and the people who belong to this world have been made drunk by the wine of her immorality."
Rev 17:3 So the angel took me in spirit* into the wilderness. There I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that had seven heads and ten horns, written all over with blasphemies against God.
Rev 17:4 The woman wore purple and scarlet clothing and beautiful jewelry made of gold and precious gems and pearls. She held in her hand a gold goblet full of obscenities and the impurities of her immorality.
Rev 17:5 A mysterious name was written on her forehead: "Babylon the Great, Mother of All Prostitutes and Obscenities in the World."
Rev 17:6 I could see that she was drunk-drunk with the blood of God's holy people who were witnesses for Jesus. I stared at her completely amazed.
Rev 17:7 "Why are you so amazed?" the angel asked. "I will tell you the mystery of this woman and of the beast with seven heads and ten horns.
Rev 17:8 The beast you saw was alive but isn't now. And yet he will soon come up out of the bottomless pit and go to eternal destruction. And the people who belong to this world, whose names were not written in the Book of Life from before the world began, will be amazed at the reappearance of this beast who had died.

The explaination goes on, but I didn't want to post it all.

Sorry that took longer than I expected

Jenn6162

I thought about it earlier today, but I don't want to encourage anyone to do what I did to see them. I don't know, I will think about that more. I don't know if I am ready for the diagnoses of others that I need to check myself into the nearest mental institution.

Paradox

1) Sagittarius - It looks like a horse prepared for battle with a human head.
2) Virgo - Hair like a woman’s hair.
3) Leo - Teeth like a lion’s teeth.
4) Scorpio - They had tails and stings like scorpions.
5) Libra - “Breastplates� like iron. The exact meaning for this word is uncertain. But they are also described as scales. The traditional weighing scales derive their name from the fact that animal scales were originally used to make these.

These 5 signs of the Zodiac are consecutive, and seeing as John actually says they are around for 5 months ... well - you get the picture (or symbology )

You also ought to know that what you've been told about the Zodiac may be misinformed too. I was told that the Zodiac was possibly Hebrew in origin. The word "Zodi" apparently means "The Way" in Hebrew. Not sure how much of that is true but perhaps you should look into it and not believe everything your pastor tells you.

Don't you think it's interesting that there is mention in the letter of Jude that there was a dispute over the body of Moses?
Also, think about who appeared on the Mount of Transfiguration with Jesus and take a close look at some of the plagues in the Tribulation and how similar they are to the Egyptian plagues. Much more convincing than the Enoch view I think.

Jenn6162

I don't go to church, because of that reason. I like to do my own research. Plus you never can tell what kind of crazies are in church. As for the zodiac stuff, my bible tells me not to mess with it. I can't help but notice how accurate it can be. The bible also tells me not to talk to dead people, not that I can't. Anyway thanks for sharing that with me, it was very interesting.
Wait a minute, I thought you were an athiest. *checks profile*
I am interested by your interest in the two witnesses who you don't believe will exist.
But yes, I am aware of the question as to whether or not his body was buried. I know it is in Deut, but I am not very familiar with the situation. I am gonna look closer at the transfiguration verses, you don't happen to know where to find them do you so I don't have to search (lol) I am asking an athiest for verses in the Bible...you are a paradox.

badger3k

Jenn, I am still curious as to how (as others pointed out) that you can claim to believe in the literal truth of the bible yet not believe in it's literal truth. You take things not as they are (literally) but as you want to read them (symbolically) - that is not even close to the Bible being literally true. You honestly can't see that what you say and do are two separate things? It's like claiming to be a vegan while you eat meat. Can't happen.

When a literalist claims that the stars will fall from the sky, they mean the stars will fall from the sky, literally. Nothing else.
What part of "without metaphor or allegory" means "with metaphor"? You can't see any hypocrisy in claiming to take it literally when you don't?

Jenn6162

As I have said many times, I believe in a literal interpretation but you also have to look at context, dispensation, and level of knowledge of the writer. So it is not black and white, and I was wrong if I made it sound as though it was. Sorry for the misunderstanding. I am not perfect, and I cannot be perfectly clear all the time. Also I believe something is a metaphor if it is revealed as such , like in Rev 17:7. As far as stars falling from the sky, I think I was wrong. I do not claim to be perfect, and I pointed out such several times. I had forgot about the verse in Matthew, so I do believe the stars will fall. Other things in Revelation like locusts, may or may not be locusts. A first century man would have a difficult time describing a helicopter don't you think? That does not make me a hypocrit.

Paradox

Hmm, considering your strong trust in the Bible, I'm wondering how you avoid its insistance that Christians should be part of a functioning body of believers. Aren't you in disobedience by isolating yourself from the church?

I don't think there's anywhere in the Bible that warns you that the Zodiac is bad. If you're referring to Astrology then that's based on the Zodiac but that's all. Would you reject Christ just because there are lots of wacky cults based on him?
Yes, about as accurate as the Bible is... cough... ahem.
Don't mind me - I was just showing off. ... Though I hope I helped to strengthen the point you realised earlier - that a great many of us here know a lot more about the Bible than you first thought. Eschatology was something of a fascination for me once. I am an atheist, yes, but I wasn't always. I used to be a fundamentalist-tongue-talkin'-Bible-thumpin'-believer. I'm glad to say that I'm not anymore.

One place to find it is in Mark 9:2-4. You won't find too much there, but the fact that they are there says a lot. They probably represent "The Law" and "The Prophets"

badger3k

That's not answering the question. How can you say you believe in the literal interpretation when you don't?

What is so hard to understand that a symbolic or metaphoric interpretation is NOT literal? Literal is a word-for-word and direct translation with NO symbolic or metaphoric interpretation. You are ignoring that when they say "locust" they LITERALLY mean "locust" - not "helicopter", not "grasshopper", not "personal rocketpacks" - they mean "locust". It's the definition of "literal". How is that hard to understand? Since the Bible is supposedly God's words direct, why would you believe that the writer's level of understanding would matter when God told them what to write? Would God deliberately try to confuse people, or would He make a mistake?

Now, since you are not a literalist, according to your own words, how to you know what is metaphor and what is not? What are the literary or textural clues that tell you that the revelation passage is one? Why should I believe that that is metaphor and the curicifixion isn't? Why can I not believe that the whole Passion affair was a metaphor for a struggle inside ourselves? Please try to be consistent.

Jenn6162

Well I said I don't attend church I never said I don't participate in online forums, discussions, Bible studies.

I agree. No I wouldn't.

You all definately know a lot more than I expected. As I said earlier, ignorant me. Would love to hear how and why you deconverted, although I suspect it is because of all those supposed inaccuracies.


Thanks Paradox, that was interesting. Nope I am a Bible literalist remember. Although some insist on calling me a hypocrit. Please share more of your knowledge, whenever you are bored. I suspect you know a lot.

Jenn6162

I answered your question, Badger. If you look at my answer to Diogenes I showed why I believed it was a metaphor, because it was explained in the same passage. So according to YOUR definition of a literalist, I am not one. So be it. God told John to write what he saw, not what to write. I think you just want to argue with me. I never claimed to have the answers for everything.