• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

The Book of Revelation is not about the end of the world

phattonez

phattonez

Catholic
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
30,870
Reaction score
4,246
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Very sparingly does it talk about the end of the world. What does it talk about? It talks about Christian worship. It talks about the Mass. If you have not heard this, you may be shocked.



Give it a chance. The parallels are amazing.
 
Last edited:
phattonez said:
Very sparingly does it talk about the end of the world. What does it talk about? It talks about Christian worship. It talks about the Mass. If you have not heard this, you may be shocked.

The Mass In The Book Of Revelation - YouTube

Give it a chance. The parallels are amazing.
Click to expand...

I've also heard theories that the book was an anti-Nero anti-Imperialist book, I think the book of revelation is about many Things, anti-imperalism, escatology, communion and others, it isn't just one thing.

There are a lot of Things in the video that are simply unsubstanciated however.
 
RGacky3 said:
I've also heard theories that the book was an anti-Nero anti-Imperialist book, I think the book of revelation is about many Things, anti-imperalism, escatology, communion and others, it isn't just one thing.

There are a lot of Things in the video that are simply unsubstanciated however.
Click to expand...

Funny how you say that when I haven't even had it posted long enough for you to view the whole thing.
 
phattonez said:
Funny how you say that when I haven't even had it posted long enough for you to view the whole thing.
Click to expand...

I'm in the middle of it, the guy isn't doing serious exegesis of the text,
 
666_Bar_Code_in_RFID_and_M_M_E_A_verichips.jpg

So, as you see, "the mark of the beast,666" is embedded in every barcode there is. :2wave:
 
phattonez said:
Very sparingly does it talk about the end of the world. What does it talk about? It talks about Christian worship. It talks about the Mass. If you have not heard this, you may be shocked.



Give it a chance. The parallels are amazing.
Click to expand...


He makes a profound point about how we tend to focus on odd things that are not really emphasized by the text and blow them up all out of proportion missing all the while the important things that are emphasized again and again.

What are the things that we have blown up all out of proportion that are mentioned only maybe once or twice or maybe not at all in the whole Bible?

That homosexual activity is a sin, for example. Whether a fetus is a human or not and that abortion is sinful, would be another example.

What are things that are emphasized again and again that we don't pay enough attention to?

"Love the Lord with all your mind and all your heart and love your neighbor as yourself," is very often a good example of that.
 
RGacky3 said:
I'm in the middle of it, the guy isn't doing serious exegesis of the text,
Click to expand...

Your arguments are riveting. Please continue with these precise and devastating retorts. :roll:
 
LowDown said:
He makes a profound point about how we tend to focus on odd things that are not really emphasized by the text and blow them up all out of proportion missing all the while the important things that are emphasized again and again.

What are the things that we have blown up all out of proportion that are mentioned only maybe once or twice or maybe not at all in the whole Bible?

That homosexual activity is a sin, for example. Whether a fetus is a human or not and that abortion is sinful, would be another example.

What are things that are emphasized again and again that we don't pay enough attention to?

"Love the Lord with all your mind and all your heart and love your neighbor as yourself," is very often a good example of that.
Click to expand...

Please don't derail my thread into an abortion and homosexual sin thread. Please comment specifically about the video.
 
phattonez said:
Your arguments are riveting. Please continue with these precise and devastating retorts. :roll:
Click to expand...

My point is there arn't really arguments in the video, it's a sermon, not serious exegesis of the text.
 
RGacky3 said:
My point is there arn't really arguments in the video, it's a sermon, not serious exegesis of the text.
Click to expand...

You're not presenting an argument, though, just presenting it as a fact without evidence.
 
phattonez said:
You're not presenting an argument, though, just presenting it as a fact without evidence.
Click to expand...

The evidence is the video itself ... I don't know what I'm supposed to argue against, I already posited my position ...
 
RGacky3 said:
The evidence is the video itself ... I don't know what I'm supposed to argue against, I already posited my position ...
Click to expand...

You've posited it but haven't backed it up, so we may as well ignore your position if you're not going to defend it.
 
phattonez said:
You've posited it but haven't backed it up, so we may as well ignore your position if you're not going to defend it.
Click to expand...



I imagine I'm not the only one who has noticed that over the past several months, you've become very aggressive in promoting Catholic doctrine and practice, very defensive about any counterarguments or critique of same, and generally very hostile towards any perspective not stamped "Approved Catholic Doctrine!"

I don't recall you acting like this until relatively recently... what changed, I wonder?
 
Goshin said:
I imagine I'm not the only one who has noticed that over the past several months, you've become very aggressive in promoting Catholic doctrine and practice, very defensive about any counterarguments or critique of same, and generally very hostile towards any perspective not stamped "Approved Catholic Doctrine!"

I don't recall you acting like this until relatively recently... what changed, I wonder?
Click to expand...

You really don't see the problem with RGacky dismissing the video while providing no evidence?
 
Furthermore, what exactly is the problem of me defending the faith in a religious discussion forum? Is defending traditional Catholic teaching not allowed for some reason?
 
phattonez said:
You really don't see the problem with RGacky dismissing the video while providing no evidence?
Click to expand...


He raised a question about the video not providing sufficient explanation for why the scripture was being interpreted in that manner; instead of addressing it in some way, or seeking another source with the kind of explanations he's looking for, it seemed to me you simply kept shouting "your critique is irrelevant!" until he went away.

In other words, he was saying "the video proclaims X means Y, but doesn't explain how GET from X to Y, just ASSERTS it." He wanted something that "shows the equation", the explanation of why this is interpreted thus.

Your response was simply to assert that his question was meaningless and irrelevant until he got frustrated and stopped asking.


That's not really debate, is it?

You're asserting that these Catholic teachings on Revelations are correct... it could be argued that the burden for "providing evidence" is on YOU, since you're the one making the original assertion... I felt that RGacky was simply saying "there's not enough explanation of how you GET there in this video, I need more" and you, no offense, kinda blew him off it seemed to me.


I'm not trying to start anything with you, okay? I'm just pointing out what I think is a flaw in your approach here. I think you need to be a little more patient, a little less aggressive, and a little more willing to expand on what you're asserting.


JM0.02
 
phattonez said:
Furthermore, what exactly is the problem of me defending the faith in a religious discussion forum? Is defending traditional Catholic teaching not allowed for some reason?
Click to expand...



Didn't say there was one. I'm simply suggesting that a less claws-out-teeth-bared approach might be more productive.
 
Goshin said:
He raised a question about the video not providing sufficient explanation for why the scripture was being interpreted in that manner; instead of addressing it in some way, or seeking another source with the kind of explanations he's looking for, it seemed to me you simply kept shouting "your critique is irrelevant!" until he went away.

In other words, he was saying "the video proclaims X means Y, but doesn't explain how GET from X to Y, just ASSERTS it." He wanted something that "shows the equation", the explanation of why this is interpreted thus.

Your response was simply to assert that his question was meaningless and irrelevant until he got frustrated and stopped asking.


That's not really debate, is it?
Click to expand...

Look at it from my point of view. I post a video describing my views on the subject. It is 18 minutes long. 5 minutes later RGacky responds and says that there are many things that are unsubstantiated in the video.

1. How does he know when he obviously hasn't even watched it?
2. Why can't he bring forward what he thinks to be unsubstantiated?

How am I supposed to debate a guy when he can't tell me what he finds wrong with the arguments that I put forward?

You're asserting that these Catholic teachings on Revelations are correct... it could be argued that the burden for "providing evidence" is on YOU, since you're the one making the original assertion... I felt that RGacky was simply saying "there's not enough explanation of how you GET there in this video, I need more" and you, no offense, kinda blew him off it seemed to me.
Click to expand...

It would be fine if he said that, or provided some other issue. All he said that the claims of the video were unsubstantiated without ever specifying what the claims were and why they were unsubstantiated. The video points to many parts of Revelation for its claims. All RGacky would have to do is point out a claim, say that there is no evidence, and then I could easily bring forward the evidence that he found lacking. He didn't do that, so again, how do I debate a guy who's not really contesting anything?

I'm not trying to start anything with you, okay? I'm just pointing out what I think is a flaw in your approach here. I think you need to be a little more patient, a little less aggressive, and a little more willing to expand on what you're asserting.
Click to expand...

I'm fine with getting into a debate on the video; I just want someone who takes issue with the video to tell me exactly what they find as a fault.
 
phattonez said:
Look at it from my point of view. I post a video describing my views on the subject. It is 18 minutes long. 5 minutes later RGacky responds and says that there are many things that are unsubstantiated in the video.

1. How does he know when he obviously hasn't even watched it?
2. Why can't he bring forward what he thinks to be unsubstantiated?

How am I supposed to debate a guy when he can't tell me what he finds wrong with the arguments that I put forward?



It would be fine if he said that, or provided some other issue. All he said that the claims of the video were unsubstantiated without ever specifying what the claims were and why they were unsubstantiated. The video points to many parts of Revelation for its claims. All RGacky would have to do is point out a claim, say that there is no evidence, and then I could easily bring forward the evidence that he found lacking. He didn't do that, so again, how do I debate a guy who's not really contesting anything?



I'm fine with getting into a debate on the video; I just want someone who takes issue with the video to tell me exactly what they find as a fault.
Click to expand...



Ok; I see what you're saying.

Bear in mind a lot of us won't watch a 15-20 minute video if we are finding things to take issue with in the first five minutes... time is valuable after all. For instance, I WANT to watch it (I've long been curious as to the Catholic viewpoints on Revelations and would like to hear those views expounded on), but I haven't yet... I'm posting in between trying to cook supper. ;)

Yeah, if he only watched a few minutes he MAY have missed the very exposition he was asking for later on... but a lot of folks on DP blow off videos longer than a few minutes if the first few minutes don't "grab us" or seem flawed. Human nature.

Okay I lost track of where I was going with that, because it is time to flip the meat now, sorry. :)
 
Goshin said:
Ok; I see what you're saying.

Bear in mind a lot of us won't watch a 15-20 minute video if we are finding things to take issue with in the first five minutes... time is valuable after all. For instance, I WANT to watch it (I've long been curious as to the Catholic viewpoints on Revelations and would like to hear those views expounded on), but I haven't yet... I'm posting in between trying to cook supper. ;)

Yeah, if he only watched a few minutes he MAY have missed the very exposition he was asking for later on... but a lot of folks on DP blow off videos longer than a few minutes if the first few minutes don't "grab us" or seem flawed. Human nature.

Okay I lost track of where I was going with that, because it is time to flip the meat now, sorry. :)
Click to expand...

I figured that a video this long might not get a lot of views, but I still hoped it would. Let me know what you think when you get a chance. Enjoy your supper!
 
Some of my own commentary on the book starting in Revelation 4:

Revelation 4:8: “Holy, holy, holy,[d] is the Lord God Almighty,
who was and is and is to come!”

Each time in Mass before the Eucharistic Prayer Catholics sing:

Sanctus sanctus sanctus, Dominus Deus Sabaoth
Pleni sunt caeli et terra gloria tua
Hosanna in excelsis
Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini
Hosanna in excelsis

Holy Holy Holy, Lord God of Hosts
Heaven and Earth are full of your glory
Hosanna in the highest
Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord
Hosanna in the highest

Revelation 4:6-7: And round the throne, on each side of the throne, are four living creatures,[c] full of eyes in front and behind: 7 the first living creature like a lion, the second living creature like an ox, the third living creature with the face of a man, and the fourth living creature like a flying eagle.

This one is a little more deceptive. These are the symbols of the 4 evangelists; that is, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Evangelists#Evangelists.27_symbols
 
phattonez said:
Look at it from my point of view. I post a video describing my views on the subject. It is 18 minutes long. 5 minutes later RGacky responds and says that there are many things that are unsubstantiated in the video.

1. How does he know when he obviously hasn't even watched it?
2. Why can't he bring forward what he thinks to be unsubstantiated?

How am I supposed to debate a guy when he can't tell me what he finds wrong with the arguments that I put forward?

It would be fine if he said that, or provided some other issue. All he said that the claims of the video were unsubstantiated without ever specifying what the claims were and why they were unsubstantiated. The video points to many parts of Revelation for its claims. All RGacky would have to do is point out a claim, say that there is no evidence, and then I could easily bring forward the evidence that he found lacking. He didn't do that, so again, how do I debate a guy who's not really contesting anything?

I'm fine with getting into a debate on the video; I just want someone who takes issue with the video to tell me exactly what they find as a fault.
Click to expand...

I watched 5 minutes, then I realized this was a sermon, not a lecture or something, the guy was just making claims, so I posted, a little early (so sue me), then I finished and turns out ... Yeah, it was just a sermon, making assertions and not explaining why, i think I have a record here of actually listening to what People say and checking the Sources.

I didn't say the video was wrong, but it's a sermon, not an argument put forward that can really be debated.

A lot of the video was explaining how different liturgies match up With Things in Revelation ... fine, I don't know what the argument is.
 
You people are just arguing about arguing.
 
RGacky3 said:
I watched 5 minutes, then I realized this was a sermon, not a lecture or something, the guy was just making claims, so I posted, a little early (so sue me), then I finished and turns out ... Yeah, it was just a sermon, making assertions and not explaining why, i think I have a record here of actually listening to what People say and checking the Sources.

I didn't say the video was wrong, but it's a sermon, not an argument put forward that can really be debated.

A lot of the video was explaining how different liturgies match up With Things in Revelation ... fine, I don't know what the argument is.
Click to expand...

The argument is that the Book of Revelation is mostly about the Divine Liturgy. This is the way worship occurs in Heaven. Most of the end of the world theories and other such things are nonsense. If you think that his interpretation is off-base, then bring forward an argument as to why that is so.
 
From the Catechism:

1137 The book of Revelation of St. John, read in the Church's liturgy, first reveals to us, "A throne stood in heaven, with one seated on the throne": "the Lord God."[SUP]1[/SUP] It then shows the Lamb, "standing, as though it had been slain": Christ crucified and risen, the one high priest of the true sanctuary, the same one "who offers and is offered, who gives and is given."[SUP]2[/SUP] Finally it presents "the river of the water of life . . . flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb," one of most beautiful symbols of the Holy Spirit.[SUP]3[/SUP]
1138 "Recapitulated in Christ," these are the ones who take part in the service of the praise of God and the fulfillment of his plan: the heavenly powers, all creation (the four living beings), the servants of the Old and New Covenants (the twenty-four elders), the new People of God (the one hundred and forty-four thousand),[SUP]4[/SUP] especially the martyrs "slain for the word of God," and the all-holy Mother of God (the Woman), the Bride of the Lamb,[SUP]5[/SUP] and finally "a great multitude which no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes, and peoples and tongues."[SUP]6[/SUP]
1139 It is in this eternal liturgy that the Spirit and the Church enable us to participate whenever we celebrate the mystery of salvation in the sacraments.

2642 The Revelation of "what must soon take place," the Apocalypse, is borne along by the songs of the heavenly liturgy[SUP]127[/SUP] but also by the intercession of the "witnesses" (martyrs).[SUP]128[/SUP] The prophets and the saints, all those who were slain on earth for their witness to Jesus, the vast throng of those who, having come through the great tribulation, have gone before us into the Kingdom, all sing the praise and glory of him who sits on the throne, and of the Lamb.[SUP]129[/SUP] In communion with them, the Church on earth also sings these songs with faith in the midst of trial. By means of petition and intercession, faith hopes against all hope and gives thanks to the "Father of lights," from whom "every perfect gift" comes down.[SUP]130[/SUP] Thus faith is pure praise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom