Space Chef

HA! Satan has tricked you! The seventh Brady kid was Phoebe, not Oliver who was merely a prophet of Satan. Phoebe was edited out of the episodes, but she still remains to the few who remember.

"Here's the story
Of a lovely lady,
Who was bringing up three very lovely girls.
All of them had hair of gold,
Except Phoebe
Who liked to pick her nose."

Phoebe is the forgotten agent of evil.


When "The Brady Bunch" debuted on Nick at Night (before moving to TV Land), they had a marathon of episodes. In between they would have parody commercials of a red haired fat girl who was digitally added to the episodes, who they called the "lost Brady". Added here as an explanation.

Doctor X

How quick one will follow False Bradys. . . .

Anyways, in an effort to prevent this from sinking to Elsewhere faster than . . . well . . . faster than it should . . . the POINT is that it is easy to "read into" a text WHATEVER one wants, especially the menagre of symbols that is Revelation.

The process involves starting with a conclusion and selectively highlighting the details that support the conclusion while ignoring contradictions. This happened in the whole WTC thread. We can do it here as well. It does not make it valid.

--J.D.

Adora

I always thought the two beasts were Rome and the Apostates of Judaism?

Doctor X

Fine . . . return to the topic . . . see if we care. . . .

Anyways, yeah . . . people have posted some wonderful links on the meaning of 666--and some funny ones on how you can get ANYONE to be "it." It seems that it is a reference to the Roman Emperor. Whether or not it is Dominitian or Nero depends on dating and symbolism . . . for example, could intending "Nero" really be a slap to a contemporary Emperor likeing calling Kerry "Dukakis?"

Oddly enough, it does not seem that in the texts either "da antichrists" or "da Beast" were considered to be "Dee Satan" as in a particular figure we all root for in those teenage horror films!

--J.D.

Amos

Ah but Doctor. X, you should know that Revelation has come and gone for post-millenarianists and it's reading should be as easy as one-two-three. I've been told that:

The first beast came out of the sea and the second beast came out of the earth. "The beast" is the animal man just after rebirth, shall we say, which brings about change after a crisis moment. If this event was incipient from God it was a non-rational event and therefore happens to the non-rational animal man wherefore the first beast came from the subconscious mind that was called the sea -- or it would have been a rational event and the beast would have come from the conscious mind that was called the earth. This distinction here was foreshadowed in Jn.1:13 between those born of God as opposed to those born of carnal desire. Again, born of God means we come from the sea and born of carnal desire means we come from the earth.

The ten horns are the ten commandments and they are shiny to show victory over sin (1Jn.3:9, "he who is in Christ cannot sin" because when freed from the law sin is not possible).

The seven heads were the seven capital sins who, when juxtaposed with the cardinal virtues, built the right kind of character in believers that can be molded into a rebirth from God ("we are the clay you are the potter").

This beast was swift, strong etc. (king, king, king), but more interesting is that the serpent had been defeated. In Catholicism Michael (Mary's right hand angel) does this and we have lots of icons on this including a statue called "Mary of Grace" with the serpent trampled underfoot. This goes for 42 months and that is the time we spend in purgatory. The mortal wound is the stigmata that remains after transfiguration (not to be confused with the final piercing).

Interesting is verse 10 where it picks up from Jn.21:18.

The second beast had no victory over sin and with two heads it was torn in the saved sinner complex. It spoke like a dragan to show that satan had not been defeated and worshipped the first beast, which of course was Jesus and, unbenown to them, all the brothers of Jesus (Jesuits we call them or at least followers of Jesus). The second beast will worship Jesus (the first beast) and then it goes on into the rest and so on, and on, but you're not really interested in that.

Dean Anderson

"Look at me, I'm Satan Dee,
Lousy with apostasy

Will not be killed,
Till the end of the world,

I can't! I'm Satan Dee!"

(from Grease III - The Apocalypse)

ephraim

Sarpedons Quote:

"However, the idea of Arafat, of all people being chosen to lead the new muslim juggernaught is ludicrous. He is neither charismatic nor is he widely respected among the islamic community. Also, he is a secularist. The PLO has always stood for a SECULAR independant Palestine. This makes him a very poor fugleman for the islamic menace".

Arafat is the guiding force behind the arab nations hate of the Jewish State. Arafat will not lead those nations as a General of an army leads his troops. It is the plight of the Palestinians that give those Arab nations their reason to fight. When Israel is taken over by the Arabs they will worship Arafat and also Satan that gave him his power. The whole Muslim religion is condemned, and that more than anything else is the mark of Arafat.

Weltall

I'm sensing some circular reasoning here.

Sarpedon

They will WORSHIP Arafat?

Do you know what a muslim is? Have you ever met any? Have you ever spoken to one?

No Muslim WORSHIPS anyone but ALLAH. You might say that Allah is satan, I can't disprove that, but it is a fact that in islamic belief Allah/God/Satan is absolutely solitary, no trinity, no intercessionary figures, no one else to give offerings or praise, or to make requests of. Even Muhammed is not accorded an intersessionary status, like the christians give to the "Virgin" Mary and oodles of saints. My definition of "Worship" is to perform rituals of respect and obedience, to offer real or symbolic gifts, to profess obedience, and to solicit supernatural aid. Would people pray to arafat for fortune or good weather? Don't you see how LUDICROUS this idea is? Have you seen a picture of Arafat? My friend and I voted him "The ugliest world leader ever," beating out Louis XIV and Disraeli. The only debate was whether he qualified as a world leader. Second, he's a slob, and behaves in a most unadmirable way. At his best he can be avuncular and amusing, but hardly the awe inspiring charismatic figure that could inspire worship. Ayatollah Khomenei had dignity. Saddam Hussein had presence. Nasser had charisma. The late King Hussein was admirable. Arafat has none of these things. If this is your antichrist, than Satan is the most incompetent of immortal angelic beings ever to conjured up by your imaginary god. He would be better off with that lard-ball Prince Fahd. Face it, NOBODY would EVER worship Yasser Arafat! What a pathetic excuse for an antichrist...Why not Hitler? He did more damage to the jewish people in a weekend than Arafat ever did! Why not Nasser? Why not Stalin? I'll tell you why not. During the lifetimes of these three, people DID say that they were the antichrist...then they died, and the world kept on spinning, and the cranks who do this sort of thing found someone else to put in their procrustean Revelations bed!

Oh..and by the way what "power" has satan given Arafat? the power to cringe in his compound whenever the israelis attack? the power to whine at the united nations? the power to go and make rambling, disjointed speaches at the Arab league? The power to issue commands and be ignored by those who are supposedly his underlings? What "power" does this man have? Please give specific examples. Is this the best your prince of darkness can do?

Doctor X

Oh my. . . .

Okay . . . of course, Iran is not Arabic, but we will let that slide.

Mayhaps . . . more likely an excuse, but we will let that slide also.

When the Cubs and the Red Sox both win the World Series? Seriously. THAT cannot really slide.

As noted above, Muslims do not do that, specifically. If this is the best Satan can do . . . I mean, sure, Satan was behind Clinton [Stop that.--Ed.] and Monica was infront [GET ON WITH IT!--Ed.] Okay . . . okay . . . anyways, ridiculous.

This is really not valid BC&H. Simply claiming that "So and So" is "da Beast" is a waste of time.

--J.D.