Television - Revelations

[MaxPC]

It comes to playing "pin the tail on the anti-christ", which, btw isn't even mentioned in the book of Revelation...

George, this one’s a keeper

[gcdonner]

It comes to playing "pin the tail on the anti-christ", which, btw isn't even mentioned in the book of Revelation...

George, this one’s a keeper

Thanks Max. Happy New Year!

[Outsider]

The answer is more closely related to the early church and the context of the book of Revelation, being in the first century. Many of the early church fathers regarded Nero as being the beast of Revelation, since the description matches him and the number also matches his name.

And I 100% agree with that. The number represents the Roman Emperor. Just as the "King of the North" in Daniel 11:36- who matches the "Man of Sin" description by Paul in 2nd Thess. 2:3- is the Emperor of Rome. If you read Daniel, and connect the historical dots you can see that the "King of the North" refers not to just one but to multiple Roman Emperors. Caesar married Cleopatra (Queen of the South)- Titus destroyed the temple and put up a temple to Jupiter in its place (abomination of Desolation)...

It comes to playing "pin the tail on the anti-christ", which, btw isn't even mentioned in the book of Revelation...

I'm not saying television is "the antichrist". Someone else brought in that terminology.

I don't believe that the antichrist or the "beast" is a person. The antichrist is a spirit that lives in the beast and the false prophet. What I am saying is television can be an idol, and as such it agrees with the description of the "image of the beast" in Revelation.

To find the precedence in scripture for the mark, I suggest you read Ezekiel 9 and then before that Deut 6:5-9.

I quoted from Ezekiel 9 in an earlier post.

BTW, do you know what the "seal of God" is? It is my firm conviction that if you really have it you won't or can't take the "mark of the beast".

I agree. See my earlier post.

[Outsider]

I don't believe that the antichrist or the "beast" is a person.

To avoid misunderstanding, I believe "the beasts" in Revelation are empires of nations, just as are the "beasts" in Daniel. They are related books. John is directed to measure in Revelations, and Daniel (as well as Ezekiel) sees a man measuring in heaven in their visions.

[gcdonner]

The answer is more closely related to the early church and the context of the book of Revelation, being in the first century. Many of the early church fathers regarded Nero as being the beast of Revelation, since the description matches him and the number also matches his name.

And I 100% agree with that. The number represents the Roman Emperor. Just as the "King of the North" in Daniel 11:36- who matches the "Man of Sin" description by Paul in 2nd Thess. 2:3- is the Emperor of Rome. If you read Daniel, and connect the historical dots you can see that the "King of the North" refers not to just one but to multiple Roman Emperors. Caesar married Cleopatra (Queen of the South)- Titus destroyed the temple and put up a temple to Jupiter in its place (abomination of Desolation)...

It comes to playing "pin the tail on the anti-christ", which, btw isn't even mentioned in the book of Revelation...

I'm not saying television is "the antichrist". Someone else brought in that terminology.

I don't believe that the antichrist or the "beast" is a person. The antichrist is a spirit that lives in the beast and the false prophet. What I am saying is television can be an idol, and as such it agrees with the description of the "image of the beast" in Revelation.

To find the precedence in scripture for the mark, I suggest you read Ezekiel 9 and then before that Deut 6:5-9.

I quoted from Ezekiel 9 in an earlier post.

BTW, do you know what the "seal of God" is? It is my firm conviction that if you really have it you won't or can't take the "mark of the beast".

I agree. See my earlier post.

If you note, I was replying strictly to the OP. There was too much of a bunny trail going on after that...LOL

[gcdonner]

I don't believe that the antichrist or the "beast" is a person.

To avoid misunderstanding, I believe "the beasts" in Revelation are empires of nations, just as are the "beasts" in Daniel. They are related books. John is directed to measure in Revelations, and Daniel (as well as Ezekiel) sees a man measuring in heaven in their visions.

The man in Ezekiel is measuring in the city of Jerusalem, not in heaven, just to clarify. I do believe the beast was a person and that the anti-christ was/is a spirit, which was already working in John's time, which was during the "last days" of the Old Covenant (OC), which is what the book of Revelation has in view and not the end of the world.
I'm sure you are aware that scripture doesn't deal with the end of time, but only the end of the age, and from my perspective that was the end of the OC age.

[Outsider]

I don't believe that the antichrist or the "beast" is a person.

To avoid misunderstanding, I believe "the beasts" in Revelation are empires of nations, just as are the "beasts" in Daniel. They are related books. John is directed to measure in Revelations, and Daniel (as well as Ezekiel) sees a man measuring in heaven in their visions.

The man in Ezekiel is measuring in the city of Jerusalem, not in heaven, just to clarify.

You may be right, and it was just a prophecy of the temple being rebuilt, but at the end of all the measuring, we have this:

4 And the glory of the Lord came into the temple by way of the gate which faces toward the east. 5 The Spirit lifted me up and brought me into the inner court, and behold, the glory of the Lord filled the temple.

6 Then I heard Him speaking to me from the temple, while )a man stood beside me. 7 And He said to me, “Son of man, this is the place of My throne and the place of the soles of My feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel forever.

--Ezekiel 43

Which is what leads me to think it was the new Jerusalem, and the temple in Heaven, which the earthly temple is but a shadow. But, obviously, the guy doing the measuring wasn't John...

I do believe the beast was a person

I think the number and the man were used to point to the identity of the beast, not to identify the man. What was Neros wound which was healed? Whereas for Imperial Rome herself, you can see the Vandals sacking her ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sack_of_Rome_%28455%29 )- and the Empire surviving in the East until nearly the time of Columbus (Constantinople fell in 1453).

and that the anti-christ was/is a spirit, which was already working in John's time,

I absolutely agree on that point.

which was during the "last days" of the Old Covenant (OC), which is what the book of Revelation has in view and not the end of the world.
I'm sure you are aware that scripture doesn't deal with the end of time, but only the end of the age, and from my perspective that was the end of the OC age.

That's pretty much where Daniel leaves things. But I think Revelation picks up where Daniel left off.

I see the Red Dragon in Revelation being pagan Imperial Rome- who gives his seat and authority to what becomes nominally Christian Byzantine Rome (the first beast, who's wound was healed).

I think much of Revelation has already come to pass, but much is still to come to pass. Who are the two witnesses whose deaths will cause the whole world to celebrate and give each other gifts, and then rise from the dead in view of the whole world, called into heaven by God? This will be televised, I'm sure.

And then there's the whole final judgement thing where the Devil, Death, and hell get cast into the lake of fire which burns eternally, along with all the souls they deceived...

IOW's I only partially agree with you on that one.

[Valerie]

The earliest Church fathers/theologians agree that was the "New Jerusalem" being written about & that Revelations was a future event (with a few exceptions like Jesus' message to the 7 churches)but that it is not written in chronological order - but certainly they didn't see it as OT- I can't count how many times someone has been named the Antichrist since I've been a Christian but historically from what I've read, he's suppose to come from the tribe of Dan. There's a plithera of opinions all I know for sure is there's a blessing offered for reading not interpreting Revelations

[gcdonner]

One thing that must be recognized when trying to interpret scripture is that it is consistent with other scripture, and can be interpreted using other scripture. The time factor for the Revelation is one such perspective that is so often overlooked in this regard. Both from internal evidence in the book itself as well as external evidence from the other books dictates that the fulfillment of the book was found in the first century AD. It is better to adjust our understanding to comply with scripture than to try and force scripture to fit our imaginations.
John says several times in the Revelation that these things were shortly to come to pass or about to come to pass and that Jesus himself declared that he would come soon. Rather than imposing an unprecedented definition of "soon", as many do, we need only to look at what the writer of the book of Hebrews had to say about the coming of Christ.

Heb 10:37  For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry. 

The book of Hebrews was written sometime in the 60s, not long before the destruction of the temple and city of Jerusalem.
I suggest that just as Jesus said,

Mat 24:34  Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

 
It happened within the contemporary generation of his incarnation. He was no false prophet and his concept of a generation in this context was the understood 40 year time period, which would culminate in AD 70.

Time is short for me now so I must leave my comments for the moment. Being an old man, I suspect that the "end of the world" for me will be sooner than for y'all.

[Outsider]

One thing that must be recognized when trying to interpret scripture is that it is consistent with other scripture, and can be interpreted using other scripture. The time factor for the Revelation is one such perspective that is so often overlooked in this regard. Both from internal evidence in the book itself as well as external evidence from the other books dictates that the fulfillment of the book was found in the first century AD. It is better to adjust our understanding to comply with scripture than to try and force scripture to fit our imaginations.
John says several times in the Revelation that these things were shortly to come to pass or about to come to pass and that Jesus himself declared that he would come soon. Rather than imposing an unprecedented definition of "soon", as many do, we need only to look at what the writer of the book of Hebrews had to say about the coming of Christ.

Heb 10:37  For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry. 

But he also says:

Matthew 24

30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

What do you say to this?

The book of Hebrews was written sometime in the 60s, not long before the destruction of the temple and city of Jerusalem.
I suggest that just as Jesus said,

Mat 24:34  Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

 
It happened within the contemporary generation of his incarnation. He was no false prophet and his concept of a generation in this context was the understood 40 year time period, which would culminate in AD 70.

Matthew 24

36 “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only."

Mark 13

32 “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

No, he is not a false prophet. He didn't prophecy when he would return. He only prophecied how. And what's a couple of thousand years to God?

Time is short for me now so I must leave my comments for the moment. Being an old man, I suspect that the "end of the world" for me will be sooner than for y'all.

You never can tell. Youth doesn't guarantee tomorrow. Nor old age forbid. May your life be long, and prosperous.