| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Libertarius" |
| Date: |
12 Jul 2005 07:03:49 PM |
| Object: |
The Stars Shall Fall From Heaven - |
"J.W." wrote:
"Jude" <Jude@thebayou.here> wrote in
news:RCWAe.1914$ag7.809@bignews4.bellsouth.net:
The stars can't "fall" from heaven. They are burning HUGE massive
balls of gaseous FIRE that can only die out. "Falling stars" are
just
space junk that are falling into the atmosphere!
Aren't we making an assumption here that isn't true?
Show me where it says the stars are going to fall from heaven TO THE
EARTH.
It doesn't say that does it? It only says the stars will fall from
heaven.
(Matthew 24:29; Mark 13:29.) It does not say where they will go once
they
fall.
Oh, and yes, they can "fall." All it takes is a greater attracing
body to
draw them to it.
John Wadsworth
john4250@earthlink.net
===>Could you not come up with a more inane argument?
SEE: Revelation 8:10-11
"And at the sounding of the third angel,
there went down from heaven a great star,
burning like a flame,
and it came on a third part of the rivers,
and on the fountains of water.
And the name of the star is Wormwood:
and a third part of the waters became bitter;
and a number of men came to their end
because of the waters,
for they were made bitter." (BEB)
Can you still deny the star falls on the EARTH? ;-)
OK, if you still think you can, how'bout THIS:
Revelation 9:1
"And at the sounding of the fifth angel
I saw a star falling from heaven to the earth..."
Convinced? ;-)
.
|
|
| User: "J.W." |
|
| Title: Re: The Stars Shall Fall From Heaven - |
12 Jul 2005 08:14:36 PM |
|
|
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
news:1121213036.404a70b80fe57313f2f66f7aea5a8295@teranews:
<Snip>
Aren't we making an assumption here that isn't true?
Show me where it says the stars are going to fall from heaven TO THE
EARTH.
It doesn't say that does it? It only says the stars will fall from
heaven.
(Matthew 24:29; Mark 13:29.) It does not say where they will go once
they
fall.
Oh, and yes, they can "fall." All it takes is a greater attracing
body to
draw them to it.
<Snip>
===>Could you not come up with a more inane argument?
SEE: Revelation 8:10-11
"And at the sounding of the third angel,
there went down from heaven a great star,
burning like a flame,
and it came on a third part of the rivers,
and on the fountains of water.
And the name of the star is Wormwood:
and a third part of the waters became bitter;
and a number of men came to their end
because of the waters,
for they were made bitter." (BEB)
Can you still deny the star falls on the EARTH? ;-)
OK, if you still think you can, how'bout THIS:
Revelation 9:1
"And at the sounding of the fifth angel
I saw a star falling from heaven to the earth..."
Convinced? ;-)
Yo, big --L. We weren't talking about that passage. We were talking about
what Jesus said in Matthew 24:29, and the parallel passage of Mark 13:29.
There was no mention of any of the stars in either of those passages
falling to the earth. That was my point.
As to the passages in Revelation, one cannot interpret that book with the
same level of literal interpretation appropriate to other books -
regardless of how "fundamentalist" one is. It just cannot be done.
Attempts to do so have been monstrous and disastrous when not entirely
humerous.
If a real star, like our sun, hit the earth, it would be curtains. No more
earth or anything in it. The Book of Revelation should have ended at verse
8:10 if that were to really happen. This necessitates interpreting the
passages to mean that star = some large bright object that had the
appearance of a star - or merely the analogy of a star falling to the
earth, to illustrate the demise or introduction of some celestial figure -
including, perhaps, the angel mentioned in the same verse.
I do no violence to the passages by interpreting them this way. Even the
Calvinist John Gill interpreted it this way. The potential for figurative
speech in such instances is also bolstered by the fact that, in John's
first vision of Jesus, he is holding seven stars - which are the seven
angels of the seven churches. (Revelation 1:16,20.) Jesus is also
referred to as "the morning star." (Id. 22:16.) Thus, the reader is put
on notice at the outset that references to "stars" are not necessarily to
be taken literally.
John Wadsworth
john4250@earthlink.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Libertarius" |
|
| Title: Re: The Stars Shall Fall From Heaven - |
13 Jul 2005 06:38:26 PM |
|
|
"J.W." wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
news:1121213036.404a70b80fe57313f2f66f7aea5a8295@teranews:
<Snip>
Aren't we making an assumption here that isn't true?
Show me where it says the stars are going to fall from heaven TO THE
EARTH.
It doesn't say that does it? It only says the stars will fall from
heaven.
(Matthew 24:29; Mark 13:29.) It does not say where they will go once
they
fall.
Oh, and yes, they can "fall." All it takes is a greater attracing
body to
draw them to it.
<Snip>
===>Could you not come up with a more inane argument?
SEE: Revelation 8:10-11
"And at the sounding of the third angel,
there went down from heaven a great star,
burning like a flame,
and it came on a third part of the rivers,
and on the fountains of water.
And the name of the star is Wormwood:
and a third part of the waters became bitter;
and a number of men came to their end
because of the waters,
for they were made bitter." (BEB)
Can you still deny the star falls on the EARTH? ;-)
OK, if you still think you can, how'bout THIS:
Revelation 9:1
"And at the sounding of the fifth angel
I saw a star falling from heaven to the earth..."
Convinced? ;-)
Yo, big --L. We weren't talking about that passage. We were talking about
what Jesus said in Matthew 24:29, and the parallel passage of Mark 13:29.
There was no mention of any of the stars in either of those passages
falling to the earth. That was my point.
As to the passages in Revelation, one cannot interpret that book with the
same level of literal interpretation appropriate to other books -
regardless of how "fundamentalist" one is. It just cannot be done.
Attempts to do so have been monstrous and disastrous when not entirely
humerous.
===>Regardless of interpretation, it shows what biblical writers meant by
"stars falling".
If a real star, like our sun, hit the earth, it would be curtains. No more
earth or anything in it.
===>Of course, in your anachronistic argument.
But the writers of the Bible thought the stars were just little lights
the ELOHIM put in the sky dome, as described in Genesis 1.
.
|
|
|
| User: "J.W." |
|
| Title: Re: The Stars Shall Fall From Heaven - |
13 Jul 2005 06:46:50 PM |
|
|
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
news:42D5A5F2.2BB9D9B@Nothing_But_The.Truth:
<Snip>
Yo, big --L. We weren't talking about that passage. We were talking
about what Jesus said in Matthew 24:29, and the parallel passage of
Mark 13:29. There was no mention of any of the stars in either of
those passages falling to the earth. That was my point.
As to the passages in Revelation, one cannot interpret that book with
the same level of literal interpretation appropriate to other books -
regardless of how "fundamentalist" one is. It just cannot be done.
Attempts to do so have been monstrous and disastrous when not
entirely humerous.
===>Regardless of interpretation, it shows what biblical writers meant
by "stars falling".
If a real star, like our sun, hit the earth, it would be curtains.
No more earth or anything in it.
===>Of course, in your anachronistic argument.
But the writers of the Bible thought the stars were just little lights
the ELOHIM put in the sky dome, as described in Genesis 1.
Please go back and address the rest of my post. Please? You know that
Revelation uses "stars" in a figurative manner, and the reader is put on
notice of that at the outset. (See e.g. Revelation 1:16,20.) The Genesis
cosmology has little to do with the figurative use of "stars" in Genesis.
[Or did you just do this JUST to see me repeat my "non-literal-
interpretation" line just for fun? ;) ]
John Wadsworth
john4250@earthlink.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "J.W." |
|
| Title: Re: The Stars Shall Fall From Heaven - |
13 Jul 2005 07:10:32 PM |
|
|
"J.W." <J.W.@hw61.com> wrote in
news:Xns9692AAB71DC24hohn@207.217.125.201:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
news:42D5A5F2.2BB9D9B@Nothing_But_The.Truth:
<Snip>
Yo, big --L. We weren't talking about that passage. We were
talking about what Jesus said in Matthew 24:29, and the parallel
passage of Mark 13:29. There was no mention of any of the stars in
either of those passages falling to the earth. That was my point.
As to the passages in Revelation, one cannot interpret that book
with the same level of literal interpretation appropriate to other
books - regardless of how "fundamentalist" one is. It just cannot
be done. Attempts to do so have been monstrous and disastrous when
not entirely humerous.
===>Regardless of interpretation, it shows what biblical writers
meant by "stars falling".
If a real star, like our sun, hit the earth, it would be curtains.
No more earth or anything in it.
===>Of course, in your anachronistic argument.
But the writers of the Bible thought the stars were just little
lights the ELOHIM put in the sky dome, as described in Genesis 1.
Please go back and address the rest of my post. Please? You know
that Revelation uses "stars" in a figurative manner, and the reader is
put on notice of that at the outset. (See e.g. Revelation 1:16,20.)
The Genesis cosmology has little to do with the figurative use of
"stars" in Genesis.
OOPS. I meant to say "the Genesis cosmology has little to do with the
figurative use of 'stars' in Revelation." My bad.
[Or did you just do this JUST to see me repeat my "non-literal-
interpretation" line just for fun? ;) ]
John Wadsworth
john4250@earthlink.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Libertarius" |
|
| Title: Re: The Stars Shall Fall From Heaven - |
13 Jul 2005 10:17:50 PM |
|
|
"J.W." wrote:
"J.W." <J.W.@hw61.com> wrote in
news:Xns9692AAB71DC24hohn@207.217.125.201:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
news:42D5A5F2.2BB9D9B@Nothing_But_The.Truth:
<Snip>
Yo, big --L. We weren't talking about that passage. We were
talking about what Jesus said in Matthew 24:29, and the parallel
passage of Mark 13:29. There was no mention of any of the stars in
either of those passages falling to the earth. That was my point.
As to the passages in Revelation, one cannot interpret that book
with the same level of literal interpretation appropriate to other
books - regardless of how "fundamentalist" one is. It just cannot
be done. Attempts to do so have been monstrous and disastrous when
not entirely humerous.
===>Regardless of interpretation, it shows what biblical writers
meant by "stars falling".
If a real star, like our sun, hit the earth, it would be curtains.
No more earth or anything in it.
===>Of course, in your anachronistic argument.
But the writers of the Bible thought the stars were just little
lights the ELOHIM put in the sky dome, as described in Genesis 1.
Please go back and address the rest of my post. Please? You know
that Revelation uses "stars" in a figurative manner, and the reader is
put on notice of that at the outset. (See e.g. Revelation 1:16,20.)
The Genesis cosmology has little to do with the figurative use of
"stars" in Genesis.
OOPS. I meant to say "the Genesis cosmology has little to do with the
figurative use of 'stars' in Revelation." My bad.
===>However, it is NOT "figurative", either in Genesis or in the
Gospels or in Revelation.
It is based on ancient Hebrew cosmology.
Perhaps when they saw a meteor shower, they assumed some of
those little lights were falling from the sky.
.
|
|
|
| User: "J.W." |
|
| Title: Re: The Stars Shall Fall From Heaven - |
13 Jul 2005 11:11:42 PM |
|
|
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
news:42D5D95E.2ED39C7D@Nothing_But_The.Truth:
<Snip>
OOPS. I meant to say "the Genesis cosmology has little to do with the
figurative use of 'stars' in Revelation." My bad.
===>However, it is NOT "figurative", either in Genesis or in the
Gospels or in Revelation.
It is based on ancient Hebrew cosmology.
Perhaps when they saw a meteor shower, they assumed some of
those little lights were falling from the sky.
Ergo, the definition of "star" would include meteors or other smaller
celestial bodies as long as they were bright and came from the heavens. In
which case, the use of the word "star" for such smaller bodies would be
appropriately literal.
I still think that, when one is told that Jesus is holding seven stars in
his hand, and those stars turn out to be seven angels, that one is put on
notice that all subsequent use of "stars" could very well be figurative.
John Wadsworth
john4250@earthlink.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Libertarius" |
|
| Title: Re: The Stars Shall Fall From Heaven - |
13 Jul 2005 11:42:19 PM |
|
|
"J.W." wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
news:42D5D95E.2ED39C7D@Nothing_But_The.Truth:
<Snip>
OOPS. I meant to say "the Genesis cosmology has little to do with the
figurative use of 'stars' in Revelation." My bad.
===>However, it is NOT "figurative", either in Genesis or in the
Gospels or in Revelation.
It is based on ancient Hebrew cosmology.
Perhaps when they saw a meteor shower, they assumed some of
those little lights were falling from the sky.
Ergo, the definition of "star" would include meteors or other smaller
celestial bodies as long as they were bright and came from the heavens. In
which case, the use of the word "star" for such smaller bodies would be
appropriately literal.
I still think that, when one is told that Jesus is holding seven stars in
his hand, and those stars turn out to be seven angels, that one is put on
notice that all subsequent use of "stars" could very well be figurative.
===>Actually, Jesus is depicted there as a MAGICIAN.
First he holds seven "stars", then the "stars" turn into "angels".
Also, later he has a sword dangling from his mouth.
It is also an act known at that time, described in the Britannica:
"a magician's trick dating back to ancient Greece and Rome,
involving the swallowing of a sword without bodily injury.
Capuleius, in his Metamorphoseon, tells of seeing the trick
in Athens, performed by a juggler on horseback.
In reality, sword swallowing is not an illusion or trick... "
.
|
|
|
| User: "J.W." |
|
| Title: Re: The Stars Shall Fall From Heaven - |
13 Jul 2005 11:49:28 PM |
|
|
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
news:42D5ED2B.EAD128CD@Nothing_But_The.Truth:
<Snip>
===>Actually, Jesus is depicted there as a MAGICIAN.
First he holds seven "stars", then the "stars" turn into "angels".
Also, later he has a sword dangling from his mouth.
It is also an act known at that time, described in the Britannica:
"a magician's trick dating back to ancient Greece and Rome,
involving the swallowing of a sword without bodily injury.
Capuleius, in his Metamorphoseon, tells of seeing the trick
in Athens, performed by a juggler on horseback.
In reality, sword swallowing is not an illusion or trick... "
Oh, isn't this magical?
Next you are going to tell me he did card tricks too. And somehow you are
going to find a way to re-interpret the words to get him a wand and a hat
from which to produce doves and bunny rabits.
You have a very, very fertile imagination.
John Wadsworth
john4250@earthlink.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Libertarius" |
|
| Title: Re: The Stars Shall Fall From Heaven - |
14 Jul 2005 12:39:27 PM |
|
|
"J.W." wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
news:42D5ED2B.EAD128CD@Nothing_But_The.Truth:
<Snip>
===>Actually, Jesus is depicted there as a MAGICIAN.
First he holds seven "stars", then the "stars" turn into "angels".
Also, later he has a sword dangling from his mouth.
It is also an act known at that time, described in the Britannica:
"a magician's trick dating back to ancient Greece and Rome,
involving the swallowing of a sword without bodily injury.
Capuleius, in his Metamorphoseon, tells of seeing the trick
in Athens, performed by a juggler on horseback.
In reality, sword swallowing is not an illusion or trick... "
Oh, isn't this magical?
Next you are going to tell me he did card tricks too.
===>Perhaps he would have, had he access to cards.
But printing had not been invented yet.
And somehow you are
going to find a way to re-interpret the words to get him a wand and a hat
from which to produce doves and bunny rabits.
===>Rabbits were not kosher.
Only fish and loaves of bread from "empty" baskets. ;-)
.
|
|
|
| User: "J.W." |
|
| Title: Re: The Stars Shall Fall From Heaven - |
14 Jul 2005 01:47:54 PM |
|
|
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
news:42D6A34E.27BF0F26@Nothing_But_The.Truth:
"J.W." wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
news:42D5ED2B.EAD128CD@Nothing_But_The.Truth:
<Snip>
===>Actually, Jesus is depicted there as a MAGICIAN.
First he holds seven "stars", then the "stars" turn into "angels".
Also, later he has a sword dangling from his mouth.
It is also an act known at that time, described in the Britannica:
"a magician's trick dating back to ancient Greece and Rome,
involving the swallowing of a sword without bodily injury.
Capuleius, in his Metamorphoseon, tells of seeing the trick
in Athens, performed by a juggler on horseback.
In reality, sword swallowing is not an illusion or trick... "
Oh, isn't this magical?
Next you are going to tell me he did card tricks too.
===>Perhaps he would have, had he access to cards.
But printing had not been invented yet.
Cards existed before printing. They were hand made.
And somehow you are
going to find a way to re-interpret the words to get him a wand and a
hat from which to produce doves and bunny rabits.
===>Rabbits were not kosher.
It doesn't matter if Rabbits weren't kosher. Magicians don't eat rabbits
out of their hats, they just pull them out.
Only fish and loaves of bread from "empty" baskets. ;-)
Distinguish between magic and miracle. Magic is all sleight of hand. The
loaves and fish were multiplied, not pulled out of baskets.
<sigh>
John Wadsworth
john4250@earthling.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Libertarius" |
|
| Title: Re: The Stars Shall Fall From Heaven - |
14 Jul 2005 03:11:37 PM |
|
|
"J.W." wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
news:42D6A34E.27BF0F26@Nothing_But_The.Truth:
"J.W." wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
news:42D5ED2B.EAD128CD@Nothing_But_The.Truth:
<Snip>
===>Actually, Jesus is depicted there as a MAGICIAN.
First he holds seven "stars", then the "stars" turn into "angels".
Also, later he has a sword dangling from his mouth.
It is also an act known at that time, described in the Britannica:
"a magician's trick dating back to ancient Greece and Rome,
involving the swallowing of a sword without bodily injury.
Capuleius, in his Metamorphoseon, tells of seeing the trick
in Athens, performed by a juggler on horseback.
In reality, sword swallowing is not an illusion or trick... "
Oh, isn't this magical?
Next you are going to tell me he did card tricks too.
===>Perhaps he would have, had he access to cards.
But printing had not been invented yet.
Cards existed before printing. They were hand made.
===>So, you think he used hand made cards?
And somehow you are
going to find a way to re-interpret the words to get him a wand and a
hat from which to produce doves and bunny rabits.
===>Rabbits were not kosher.
It doesn't matter if Rabbits weren't kosher. Magicians don't eat rabbits
out of their hats, they just pull them out.
===>But he was more interested in impressing his crowds by feeding
them. His crowds preferred fish.
Only fish and loaves of bread from "empty" baskets. ;-)
Distinguish between magic and miracle. Magic is all sleight of hand.
===>But they are done to fool people into believing that a miracle is being
performed. There are no real "miracles".
The loaves and fish were multiplied, not pulled out of baskets.
===>They had to be "pulled out" of SOMETHING.
Was it his hat?
.
|
|
|
| User: "J.W." |
|
| Title: Re: The Stars Shall Fall From Heaven - |
14 Jul 2005 06:45:27 PM |
|
|
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
news:42D6C6F9.7DFAFAAA@Nothing_But_The.Truth:
<Snip>
Next you are going to tell me he did card tricks too.
===>Perhaps he would have, had he access to cards.
But printing had not been invented yet.
Cards existed before printing. They were hand made.
===>So, you think he used hand made cards?
This is getting way out of hand <pun>. I'm going to call your bluff <pun>,
and simply suggest that he didn't use cards because he wasn't a magician.
I thought you were going to tell me that he used card.
And somehow you are
going to find a way to re-interpret the words to get him a wand
and a hat from which to produce doves and bunny rabits.
===>Rabbits were not kosher.
It doesn't matter if Rabbits weren't kosher. Magicians don't eat
rabbits out of their hats, they just pull them out.
===>But he was more interested in impressing his crowds by feeding
them. His crowds preferred fish.
He was multiplying them, not pulling them out of unknown places by sleight
of hand. And he didn't do it to impress them; he did it to feed them.
Only fish and loaves of bread from "empty" baskets. ;-)
Distinguish between magic and miracle. Magic is all sleight of hand.
===>But they are done to fool people into believing that a miracle is
being performed. There are no real "miracles".
Rudolph Bultmann would have loved you. If God created the heavens and the
earth, then healing a few people or making a little extra food is a trifle
by comparison. Some people are, as Bultmann said, simply disassociated
from the miraculous and supernatural because of our modern "scientific"
mind set. That, to me is one of the dumbest reasons for not believing in
God or supernatural phenomena. Using different glasses doesn't make the
subject matter go away.
The loaves and fish were multiplied, not pulled out of baskets.
===>They had to be "pulled out" of SOMETHING.
Was it his hat?
How about thin air.
You're in a jolly mood lately. What gives? I like you much better this
way - even if you are an heritic and apostate.
Cheers,
John Wadsworth
john4250@earthlink.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Libertarius" |
|
| Title: Re: The Stars Shall Fall From Heaven - |
14 Jul 2005 07:41:35 PM |
|
|
"J.W." wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
news:42D6C6F9.7DFAFAAA@Nothing_But_The.Truth:
<Snip>
Next you are going to tell me he did card tricks too.
===>Perhaps he would have, had he access to cards.
But printing had not been invented yet.
Cards existed before printing. They were hand made.
===>So, you think he used hand made cards?
This is getting way out of hand <pun>. I'm going to call your bluff <pun>,
and simply suggest that he didn't use cards because he wasn't a magician.
I thought you were going to tell me that he used card.
And somehow you are
going to find a way to re-interpret the words to get him a wand
and a hat from which to produce doves and bunny rabits.
===>Rabbits were not kosher.
It doesn't matter if Rabbits weren't kosher. Magicians don't eat
rabbits out of their hats, they just pull them out.
===>But he was more interested in impressing his crowds by feeding
them. His crowds preferred fish.
He was multiplying them, not pulling them out of unknown places by sleight
of hand.
===And how do you know that?
And he didn't do it to impress them; he did it to feed them.
===>Sure, sure.
Only fish and loaves of bread from "empty" baskets. ;-)
Distinguish between magic and miracle. Magic is all sleight of hand.
===>But they are done to fool people into believing that a miracle is
being performed. There are no real "miracles".
Rudolph Bultmann would have loved you. If God created the heavens and the
earth,
===>That's a BIG "IF", an totally unwarranted ASSumption.
then healing a few people or making a little extra food is a trifle
by comparison.
===>But that CAN BE DONE by a good magician.
Some people are, as Bultmann said, simply disassociated
from the miraculous and supernatural because of our modern "scientific"
mind set. That, to me is one of the dumbest reasons for not believing in
God or supernatural phenomena. Using different glasses doesn't make the
subject matter go away.
===>Using blind belief, combined with fantasizing, does not prove the existence
of deities, either.
Nor does it make a magician into a "GOD".
The loaves and fish were multiplied, not pulled out of baskets.
===>They had to be "pulled out" of SOMETHING.
Was it his hat?
How about thin air.
===>WOW!
Now THAT is real magic!
You're in a jolly mood lately. What gives? I like you much better this
way - even if you are an heritic and apostate.
===>Saul/Paul was an "apostate" to Judaism, and look how successful
HE was! ;-)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Libertarius" |
|
| Title: Re: The Stars Shall Fall From Heaven - |
13 Jul 2005 07:49:53 PM |
|
|
"J.W." wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
news:42D5A5F2.2BB9D9B@Nothing_But_The.Truth:
<Snip>
Yo, big --L. We weren't talking about that passage. We were talking
about what Jesus said in Matthew 24:29, and the parallel passage of
Mark 13:29. There was no mention of any of the stars in either of
those passages falling to the earth. That was my point.
As to the passages in Revelation, one cannot interpret that book with
the same level of literal interpretation appropriate to other books -
regardless of how "fundamentalist" one is. It just cannot be done.
Attempts to do so have been monstrous and disastrous when not
entirely humerous.
===>Regardless of interpretation, it shows what biblical writers meant
by "stars falling".
If a real star, like our sun, hit the earth, it would be curtains.
No more earth or anything in it.
===>Of course, in your anachronistic argument.
But the writers of the Bible thought the stars were just little lights
the ELOHIM put in the sky dome, as described in Genesis 1.
Please go back and address the rest of my post. Please? You know that
Revelation uses "stars" in a figurative manner,
===>That is YOUR claim.
However, the image of "stars falling" is a LITERAL image,
You can make it "figurative", though, as you prefer. ;-)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray" |
|
| Title: Re: The Stars Shall Fall From Heaven - |
27 Jul 2005 10:28:47 AM |
|
|
It is impossible for a star to fall to earth, but not for the earth to fall
to a star, size matters ;-)
The stars of Rev 12 are angels, that is fallen angels, as is Satan, the
dragon also called the serpent.
But look at a falling star, as by popular vernacular passed down for most
likely thousands of years, describing space rocks, that is meteors burning
up in the astmosphere. That is the only practical essence of a falling star
possible.
But consider also describing an missile such as a Tomahawk enroute to its
target at night. To someone watching it from the distance, it would be like
the falling star, that is a meteor burning up and when it hits the ground as
in Rev 9:1-11, it will cause lots of fire which would look like the
bottomless pit (if one was describing from ones concepts, as only one can,
for one cannot describe the indescribable of things not known about).
And when you look at many other factors, with 9:11, verse 9:11 and sept 11,
2001, with their being 555 days between that and Iraq on 20 03 2003. We see
many 5's there, and Rev 9:1-11 is the 5th Trumpet.
Incidentally, Jesus can be seen to have been born on sept 11, 3BC, 2003
years prior to 2001 (no year zero) that is 2003 three times. And also note
first the christ then the antichrist on 911. The anti christ is the
destroyer as of Dan 9:27.
But also consider 9:11pm in time of day as the 24 hour clock.
That would make it 21:11.
Daniel 11:21 is when the beast, final king, anti christ comes to power.
There are many clues which are there for those which dont want to be too
religious and look for the truth and what the all knowing God has designed
for signs to back them.
2001, 20 01, you can see that date in US history as GWB coming to power, in
Australia it is the 21st. 21 01 2001. Can you see 11:21 and a 2 there? an
also the three zeros, 000 is the Australia version of 911!
Now who still wants to say its all a coincidence?
George Bush 2 has the same value as Antichrist in a numbering code of the
English Language.
The number of days between GWB and the programmer of the code is the exact
formula of the program to synchronize ASCII to that code of Barry R Smith
(deceased 2002).
There are many more of these signs including code programmer having the same
value as Holy Spirit. And the code programmers name also having the same
value as Holy Spirit, and then in ASCII it comes also to 911!
Still saying God has not given us signs? These are all can be investigated
and seen, but one has to be able to think with an open mind and have more
than a few variables to put together. If one looks at only 3 bricks, they
dont know if its only 3 brick or a whole wall, and if a whole wall, then
perhaps it goes all the way around and makes a building. And that building
could be a backyard dunny, or it could be a mansion or even bigger. But if
one only sees 3 bricks, its only 3 bricks. One has to explore the truth in
order to see where it goes.
Point to make. One can ignore the Holy Spirit as Apostle Peter did,
requiring a vision to have him accept the gentiles. For such a thought was
heresy before the visions and the practical example of the Holy Spirit
falling on Cornelius the Roman. Before that he was conditioned to think
Gentiles were not regarded by God, and only the Jews had eternal life. But
it took 3 visions, an angel and a plan by God to get him to hear what God
had put on his heart anyway. And when the spirit fell he declared what was
on his heart. For a God of justice has to fit to the rules of being just,
and to condemn gentiles for being gentiles is not just. Considering God
loves all mankind.
Likewise in prophecy, there is a lot of dogma getting in the way of the Holy
Spirit. Clues are there, but unless one follows the road to see where it
leads, then one has already made up their mind and refuses to go the extra
mile to see where it leads. Keep going until you get to a dead end, and you
will find the truth, for you see it is not a dead end, but a full circle
which backs up other factors.
PEace
--
Patterns in languages show Jesus is not a Myth.
Language Signs, show divine authorship, a Miracle!
The formula synchronizes 2 codes to work, the
number required is the programmers year of birth.
Numerical patterns show a world leader of 666
Numerical patterns show code programmer of 888
Difference in days between them is 6416 days, the codes
formula numbers of the code principles (-64 = 1, x 6 = 6)
These are only the beginning of many more signs which
show that the Beast is in power, and prophecy is happening.
Numerical evidence backs the messenger with many clues to
both wake him up to action, as well as to prove it is not
his own message but is one from the signs adding up.
www.watchman888.land.ru/
Lets sow Peace the Way Jesus said, to Love one another with Respect
www.worldpeace.mail333.com/
Ray Michael O'Keeffe
Testifying to what I have seen in researching patterns.
God has given many signs to back this message.
Read this testimony of how they fitted together...
http://watchman888.land.ru/html/BearingWitness.htm
"J.W." <J.W.@hw61.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9691B99728A34hohn@207.217.125.201...
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
news:1121213036.404a70b80fe57313f2f66f7aea5a8295@teranews:
<Snip>
Aren't we making an assumption here that isn't true?
Show me where it says the stars are going to fall from heaven TO THE
EARTH.
It doesn't say that does it? It only says the stars will fall from
heaven.
(Matthew 24:29; Mark 13:29.) It does not say where they will go once
they
fall.
Oh, and yes, they can "fall." All it takes is a greater attracing
body to
draw them to it.
<Snip>
===>Could you not come up with a more inane argument?
SEE: Revelation 8:10-11
"And at the sounding of the third angel,
there went down from heaven a great star,
burning like a flame,
and it came on a third part of the rivers,
and on the fountains of water.
And the name of the star is Wormwood:
and a third part of the waters became bitter;
and a number of men came to their end
because of the waters,
for they were made bitter." (BEB)
Can you still deny the star falls on the EARTH? ;-)
OK, if you still think you can, how'bout THIS:
Revelation 9:1
"And at the sounding of the fifth angel
I saw a star falling from heaven to the earth..."
Convinced? ;-)
Yo, big --L. We weren't talking about that passage. We were talking
about
what Jesus said in Matthew 24:29, and the parallel passage of Mark 13:29.
There was no mention of any of the stars in either of those passages
falling to the earth. That was my point.
As to the passages in Revelation, one cannot interpret that book with the
same level of literal interpretation appropriate to other books -
regardless of how "fundamentalist" one is. It just cannot be done.
Attempts to do so have been monstrous and disastrous when not entirely
humerous.
If a real star, like our sun, hit the earth, it would be curtains. No
more
earth or anything in it. The Book of Revelation should have ended at
verse
8:10 if that were to really happen. This necessitates interpreting the
passages to mean that star = some large bright object that had the
appearance of a star - or merely the analogy of a star falling to the
earth, to illustrate the demise or introduction of some celestial figure -
including, perhaps, the angel mentioned in the same verse.
I do no violence to the passages by interpreting them this way. Even the
Calvinist John Gill interpreted it this way. The potential for figurative
speech in such instances is also bolstered by the fact that, in John's
first vision of Jesus, he is holding seven stars - which are the seven
angels of the seven churches. (Revelation 1:16,20.) Jesus is also
referred to as "the morning star." (Id. 22:16.) Thus, the reader is put
on notice at the outset that references to "stars" are not necessarily to
be taken literally.
John Wadsworth
john4250@earthlink.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bill" |
|
| Title: Re: The Stars Shall Fall From Heaven - |
13 Jul 2005 02:21:22 PM |
|
|
So what! It's all just a bunch of myth and nonsense anyway!
"Libertarius" <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in message
news:1121213036.404a70b80fe57313f2f66f7aea5a8295@teranews...
"J.W." wrote:
"Jude" <Jude@thebayou.here> wrote in
news:RCWAe.1914$ag7.809@bignews4.bellsouth.net:
The stars can't "fall" from heaven. They are burning HUGE massive
balls of gaseous FIRE that can only die out. "Falling stars" are
just
space junk that are falling into the atmosphere!
Aren't we making an assumption here that isn't true?
Show me where it says the stars are going to fall from heaven TO THE
EARTH.
It doesn't say that does it? It only says the stars will fall from
heaven.
(Matthew 24:29; Mark 13:29.) It does not say where they will go once
they
fall.
Oh, and yes, they can "fall." All it takes is a greater attracing
body to
draw them to it.
John Wadsworth
john4250@earthlink.net
===>Could you not come up with a more inane argument?
SEE: Revelation 8:10-11
"And at the sounding of the third angel,
there went down from heaven a great star,
burning like a flame,
and it came on a third part of the rivers,
and on the fountains of water.
And the name of the star is Wormwood:
and a third part of the waters became bitter;
and a number of men came to their end
because of the waters,
for they were made bitter." (BEB)
Can you still deny the star falls on the EARTH? ;-)
OK, if you still think you can, how'bout THIS:
Revelation 9:1
"And at the sounding of the fifth angel
I saw a star falling from heaven to the earth..."
Convinced? ;-)
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
