Kattaz

Chapka, if you have the oportunity to kill a muslim, and you know nobady can find this ever, nobady will judge you, you kill him or you let him live? Think at this. I know if I kill him, is somebady who will judge me one day, and this is the God. I can forgive, but you are blinded for revenge.
About argumentation, all this explination are located in Revelation. It is right when you read a book, the Biblie, to see the passages who complete each other, not individually analize them. I also consider that my arguments about WTC are completing each other, and your arguments about other events are singular ones. I’m sorry for you that you live in that doomed city of New York.
In fact this is another argument: like tower of Babel was built in a city with all people of the world, WTC was build in a city in which all nations, all languages of the world are represented. This make New York such a unique city, this make it the perfect place for location of Revelation’s Babylon.
Chapka, you have right that some passages of Revelation and Daniel book are about Jesus and Roman empire, but that is only the beginig of the end, a very long period of time because God want to offer to many generation the chance to find Him.

chapka

Why do you think that I'm "blinded for revenge" or that I'd want to "kill a muslim"? You're the only one here who's implied that the deaths of the people at the WTC were a good thing. I personally don't want to see any more killing in the name of anyone's religion.

If I had the opportunity, I would capture the planners of the WTC attack and bring them to justice. If I'd known what the WTC hijackers were planning in advance and had the chance to stop them, of course I would have, even if it meant killing them before they could kill thousands of innocent people. Wouldn't you?

In other words, you're not going to respond to my arguments, either because you recognize that any of my five scenarios fit the "prophecy" as well or better, or because you don't know enough about history to discuss any flaw in my scenario, as I've repeatedly asked you to do.

I'll try again: which facts exactly in my "Babylon=Bastille" scenario doesn't complement each other? I think I've proposed a perfectly rational, consistent example of the events described in the passage quoted earlier: the fall of the Bastille and the execution of the Bourbon court.

And where does this "all nations" stuff come from? And why does that make New York the perfect location for this particular sign of the Apocalypse?

Ellis14

IMHO Chapka, I would not bother arguing with Kattaz, because logic and rationality do not seem to be relevant to him.

I also find the way he is twisting a sad and horrific event to suit his perverted and absurd view of a mythical book to be quite obnoxious, giving that his argument was refuted on the first page, and he is not listening to what people are saying.

No personal insult to Kattaz intended, but I question whether arguing with him is really worth it anymore.