Kattaz

OK, some of you seems that are fixet to that hour; it’s obviously that WTC was collapsed in one hour. Even the difference between a twelve part of a day-light in 11 september and one hour is not so big, I must remember you that John have no swiss watch, and at a fact, have no watch at all. His time have never minutes, seconds, etc. More, is clear to me that he used a exclusive method of measuremet time, and that mean if one hour is not complete, it’s not considered in calcul. It’s like the age, even you have 26 years and 7 mounth, you say about yourself that you have 26 years. Using official chronology, we have one hour and 43 minutes time of collapse, but we must take back some minutes from a twelve part a day-light, remain 40, we take back some minutes from incertitude of official surses, remain 30-35 minutes, we have to take back errors in human apreciation of time without watches, the case of John, remain 20-25 minutes over one hour. But this time John could’n write, because in that time minutes doesn’t exist.

Amaleq13

Kattaz,


The actual facts do not support your conclusion and your increasingly strained attempts to force the facts to fit that conclusion only serve to highlight the absence of rational thought involved in your argument. You offer no evidence for the bizarre claim that around 1700 of the victims were rescue workers. You offer no evidence that the author of Revelation was rounding the time. You offer no substantiation for the otherwise apparently arbitrary number of subtracted minutes. You continue to assert uncertainty in the record regarding the total duration of the destruction (I'm assuming that is what "incertitude of official surses" means) when there is no uncertainty evident.

In summary, you are making yourself look more and more foolish with every post. You are wasting your time with this nonsense as well as that of anyone bothering to read it. Save the effort and the bandwidth.

This will be my final post on this subject because, for anyone valuing rational thought, your argument has been conclusively shown to have no merit.

Kattaz

The facts show that only WTC can be the Babylon. And the arguments doesn’t stop here, the next one is the proximity to the sea. Indeed, it’s really hard to find another building with such importance like ex-WTC to global commerce that is, like Bible said, so close to sea. If we read Revelation 18:18 „Every sea captain, and all who travel by ship, the sailors, and all who earn their living from the sea, will stand far off. When they see the smoke of her burning, they will exclaim, 'Was there ever a city like this great city?'”. Certanly, proximity to the sea is a big specific, but it’s not the only in this verse. We see that the „sailors” actually see the smoke of WTC burning. This smoke was very powerful and because it raise to sky, he can be seen for very long distances. That is a perfect description of 11 september events, and we see that even the burning and smoke who last for weeks, is indicated in Revelation 18:9 „...see the smoke of her burning, they will weep and mourn over her”.

Ellis14

IT seems to me that Kattaz amongst other people who admire fakes like Uri Gellar etc should read this:

http://www.skepdic.com/lawofnumbers.html
(R. Carroll discusses Gellar's "wonderful" coincidences about 9/11. Perhaps Kattaz would find something about Nostradus of interest too:
http://www.skepdic.com/nostrada.html )

Anything that is abstract, poetic, rich in imagery, and open to many elaborate interpretations can be twisted to mean just about anything if one tries hard enough, or looks hard enough.

As David Myers said, and a few others on this thread have pointed out, coincidences occur, that's why they are noted with hindsight, not predicted with forsight.

What Kattaz is doing is best described by Robert Carroll in the above linked-article:

"...a game played with numbers and with people's minds. Sometimes it is amusing. Sometimes it is pathetic."

Of course given the general quality of Kattaz's posts that can only be compared to pig excrement, or at best incoherent mindless drivel, I don't expect him to read or even understand those articles, much less the excellent posts that have been made refuting his ridiculous assertions. His ignorance has gone from dogmatic to nonsensical and it makes me sick.

Edited to add ad hominems.

chapka

I'm still waiting for an explanation. What about these events makes them fit the passage you mentioned less than the WTC? For starters, every one of them had more of a long-term effect on trade than did the WTC attack. Unlike the WTC, the Bastille, the Savoy, and most of the major landmarks of Constantinople weren't rebuilt.

Pay special attention to Rev. 18:4-7, which is much more apposite to the release of the prisoners of the Bastille, who were there, of course, under the authority of the queen, Marie Antoinette. Remember that Marie refused to weep or plead at her trial, considering that it would show weakness, and that to goad her, her tribunal called her "the widow Capet," a name she refused to acknowledge. "Her plague . . . of famine" seems appropriate for the woman who reputedlty said "Let them eat cake." And of course the Revolution set off great consternation among the kings and queens of Europe, for whom France was an important trading partner and most of whom were blood relatives of the French royalty. The things mentioned in 18:22-23 were all found in the Bastille, especially in those royal prison chambers reserved for wealthy prisoners, "the world's great men." And let's not forget that the French instability generated by the Revolution later led to the Napoleonic wars, in which the merchant fleets of Europe were pretty well decimated.

Care to refute this, or any of the other four? Do you understand now how "prophecy" works?

Koyaanisqatsi

You don't understand, chapka. Prophecy only "works" when there's an open question in someone's mind (i.e., it only applies to events that haven't already been proved through the passage of time to not have been prophesied).

Since this event happened during Kattaz's lifetime, it therefore must represent fulfillment of prophesy or else all of the promises of "end times" and "judgment" that people like Kattaz seem to spend all of their time praying for will be (as always for the past two thousand years) proved false.

Every single generation thinks they are the ones who are to witness Armegeddon and every single generation has been dead wrong (pun intended). Thus, Kattaz can't be wrong or else his beliefs are also wrong, though, of course, ten years from now he'll still be wrong and just look for the next "fulfillment."

Just picture the classic snake eating its own tail and you'll understand Kattaz's thinking. If time has already proved it false, then the prophecy could not have been describing the Bastille or Dresden or anything, so his mind must always seek out the next portent; the next "sign." Seek and you shall continue to seek in an endless loop around and around and around and around.

Jack the Bodiless

There are, however, many cities close to the sea. They're called seaports.

...Why the urge to alter the Bible in a failed attempt to make it fit recent events? Why not simply imagine that a future city, maybe hundreds of years from now, WILL fit the prophecy?

Why is Isaac Newton still the only Christian I've ever heard of who prophesied that the "end times" would be many centuries after his own time (he predicted 2060)?

chapka

Sounds a lot like the sack of Constantinople, which disrupted routes of commerce which had been in place since the Bronze Age. You could probably see the smoke for hundreds of miles; the entire city burned for weeks as the Christian fanatics sacked, looted, raped and pillaged.

Furthermore, Constantinople was a city associated with heresy and schism, and its rulers were humiliated before being killed in the street.

What makes your interpretation better than mine?

Kattaz

Chapka, I notice your question and I assure you the answer will come with the other similitudes between 11 september and Babilon collapse. Anyway, a sufficient answer is right now the fact that New York is the only city that have a building named „World Trade Center” and who really was the world trade center who crumbled in only few seconds and who was holded by Port Authority.
Jack the Bodiless, the collapse of Babylon doesn’t mean the end of the time, there are still many things to happen. And from what I know, Newton predict something about 1844, and that proved to be false because this moment is, and it would be, a secret for every human.
Ellis10, Chapka, Koyaanisqatsi, Jack the Bodiless, readers, I have three questions for you about fulfilment of a prophecy:
1) You don’t beleive in justice, in true and in love for all people? If you beleive in that, you beleive in God and you’ll be saved. If one man live for five thousand years, how many things he can learn? Why our brain capacity is more developed than we need in this life?
2) If we can make associantions between events and prophecies, we can also make differences between important associations and no-sense ones. (11 september 2001; 2+0+0+1=3 and 3 is different than 11 Ellis10). If rationally we see important associations, why should accuse the fulfilment is false?
3) If John write o prophecy two thousand years ago, the fulfilment should not be in future?
Why you don’t have patience and ask all prophecies to happen in front of your eyes? And why when it’s finally happen one, the scepticism is stronger than faith?
You don’t need to answer, just meditate.

Ellis14

This isn't a meditation board, so I will answer.

So what? The WTC and New York aren't mentioned in Revelation either. You cannot draw your own dots, draw your own lines between them and think you have cracked the puzzle!

Not those living at the time. You are going off your present day interpretation. Your view is one of egocentrism, as someone else has already observed; prophecies about Armageddom etc always HAVE to occur in "our" lifetime, otherwise there is no use. You cannot allow the possibility that the prophecy has already been fulfilled or that it will be in the distant future because then you would have no interest in it.

You make three seperate and irrelevant questions. I believe in justice, truth and love, but that doesn't mean I believe in God. Your statement is fallacious and is a variant of the false dichotomy. What does any of this prove about prophecy?

Man could learn a lot of things if he lived 5000 years, so what? What does this prove about prophecy?

Our brain capacity is more greater than 70-80 years makes use of? So what? We reach our peak of physical prowess long before we live half that time and the human body itself is riddled with inefficiencies and disabilities, so what? The fact that we have the brain capacity for a greater time than what we can live demonstrates this. Either way, what is your point:

We have a large brain capacity: therefore my prophecy is correct.

What does brain capacity have to do with prophecy?

You are right, we can tell the difference between important associations and nonsense ones. Correlation doesn't establish causality; coincidences happen. You read Revelation and see a prophecy about the WTC. Some people see Jesus' face in the Turin shroud or Mary in a dollop of ice-cream. So what?

Why? Is there some divine calender which regulates prophecy fulfilment? Why must the prophecy refer to something in our lifetime, or in this case, very conveniently in the recent past. Which of course you had no idea about until AFTER it happened. Stretching an ancient book of myth to a past event in hindsight in not prophecy.
In any case, your argument begs the question because you assume John wrote a prophecy in the first place.

Faith is no substitute for scepticism. If the prophecy is true then it should be obvious and demonstratable. But it's not. There is nothing to fear from scepticism except the truth. If it's true then we can discover that. We look at your prophecy about the WTC with scepticism and discover that it's bunk, and that is the most polite thing I can say.

In any event, if God inspired the prophecy and knew that it would happen, why didn't he make it obvious so we could avoid it, or make people interpret it correctly before it happened? Or does God like to mess us around saying "told you so! told you so!" after the event, even though he never told us in the first place?

ps:- 400 UP!