Free Republic

Again, much assumption being made...

For instance, you write:

Uhh ... I said the Gospels, the 'Gospel according to John', -- Not the 'The Apocalypse of John' (Revelation).
and
The 'seven kings' are the Roman emperors. Nero Claudius Drusus or Nero was the fifth emperor; and according to text, he has already fallen.

among other quotes from your post.

Actually, Nero was the sixth emperor. Revelation 17:10 says, "And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space." The five "kings" were not ruling at the same time, for the text stated "five are fallen," meaning that five of those kings had come and gone. Then "one is," meaning the "king" who was ruling at the time Revelation was written. Here, in this verse, we have one of the clearest proofs for Nero being the beast. If we simply examine the list of Roman Emperors, we will be able to determine who the sixth king was. Flavius Josephus clearly points out that Julius Caesar was the first emperor of Rome, followed by Augustus; Tiberius; Caius (Caligula); Claudius; and the sixth emperor was…Nero (Antiquities, books 18 and 19), who assumed imperial power upon the death of the fifth emperor, Claudius, in October, A.D. 54. The matter is confirmed just a little later in the writings of Roman historians: Suetonius (Lives of the Twelve Caesars and Dio Cassius, Roman History 5). Nero reigned from 54AD to June of 68AD. John informs us that the seventh king was "not yet come." That would be Galba, who assumed power upon Nero's death in June, A.D. 68. But he was only to continue a "short space." As a matter of historical fact, his reign lasted but six months until January 15, A.D. 69. So anyway, that my rendering of the text, history, and theology.

John was the last at ~90-120CE.

You do make some assumptions in your post - for example, you state that John's Gospel was the last at circa 90-120 A.D. Your data is based on critical research and it appears you are bringing your theology to your scholarship.

Biblical scholars do not all agree with that at all. Sure, the "Left Behind" series puts Revelation in a 90-95 A.D. timeframe of origin, but historically, the church has thought and taught otherwise.

For example, Hank Hanegraaff writes:

First, let me say this: it's instructive to note that the late dating for Revelation is largely dependant on a single -- and markedly ambiguous -- sentence in the writings of a church father named Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons. That sentence can be taken to mean either that John or that John's apocalyptic vision was seen toward the end of Domitian's reign. Moreover, the credibility of Irenaeus as a source is called into question by his contention in the same volume that Jesus was crucified when he was about fifty years of age. I don't think there are too many evangelicals that hold to that proposition.

Furthermore, if the apostle John were indeed writing in AD 95, it seems incredible that he would make no mention whatsoever of the most apocalyptic event in Jewish history -- the demolition of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple at the hands of Titus. This would be tantamount to writing a history of New York City today and making no mention of the destruction of the World Trade Center at the hands of terrorists on September 11, 2001. More directly, imagine writing a thesis on the future of terrorism in America and failing to mention the Manhattan Massacre.

Here's another parallel. Imagine that you are reading a history concerning Jewish struggles in Nazi Germany and find no mention whatsoever of the Holocaust. Would it be historically ridiculous or historically reasonable to suppose this history had been written prior to the outbreak of World War II? The answer is self-evident. Just as it stretches credulity to suggest that a history on the Jews in Germany written in the aftermath of World War II would make no mention of the Holocaust, so too it is quite unlikely that Revelation could have been written twenty-five years after the destruction of Jerusalem and yet make no mention of the most apocalyptic event in Jewish history.

Finally, those who hold that the book of Revelation was written in AD 95 face an even more formidable obstacle! Consider one of the most amazing prophecies in all of Scripture. Jesus was leaving the Temple one day when his disciples called his attention to its buildings. As they gazed upon its massive stones and magnificent structures, Jesus uttered the unthinkable: "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down....This generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened." Less than forty years later, this prophecy, no doubt still emblazoned upon the tablet of their collective consciousness, became a vivid and horrifying reality. Josephus describes the utter devastation as the altar was surrounded by "corpuses, blood flowing down the steps of the sanctuary." He says "The temple was in flames, the victors stole everything they could get their hands on. They slaughtered all who were caught, no pity shown for age or rank, old or young, children, men, women, the laity, the priests, they're all massacred." And he also notes that the Temple was doomed August 30 AD 70, "the very day on which the former temple had been destroyed by the king of Babylon."

I'm not trying to "attack you" in this post but just want to defend my Christian faith as I feel it has been misrepresented by someone who doesn't even espouse the faith any longer! Anyway, thanks for the intriguing dialogue.

I LOVE that Bradbury story - I can't wait to see it on the Big Screen. I'm also anxiously awaiting Gibson's rendition of F451.

Welcome, Jibaholic. We're happy you made the right choice!

"I know I'm sounding a little nuts here, but each day the actions of the Dems LOOK like a coup in progress."

You are not nuts - it does indeed appear that the Dems are mounting a coup. 10,000 lawyers, Kerry SWAT teams, claiming victory even if he loses, asking people to scream voter fraud when there isn't any, etc. etc. They are trying to force their political system into power regardless of the will of people or rule of law.

Sounds good - but do the political scientists take into account all the cheating, false charges of voter fraud, and liberal court case possibilities brought on by the 10,000 lawyers?

One week left - let's do all we can to STOP the media wing of the Dem party from trying to sabotage this election!

Phsstpok, This isn't a mutiny story, but it is worth looking at as well. ABCNews is trying to sway public opinion of the military and its Commander In Cheif with stories like this one...

http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/IraqCoverage/story?id=163109&page=1

Worst quote in the story: "Well, in a way, I'm kind of lucky losing both arms because I've been told I'll probably get 100 percent disability," he said.

The media is trying hard to push the fence sitters to become Michael Moore-like antiwar, anti-American leftists. Thanks for your post here to motivate the Freepers to dig into these stories.

I can't wait until all this is behind us and the name John Kerry is used in sentences along with Michael Dukakis and Walter Mondale.

Keep up the good fight.

My only fear - and I don't know what we can do to combat this - is the issue of voter fraud. I am quite worried about all the multiple registrations going on. I think the dems will be engaged in more corruption this time than they ever have before. The MSM is not really saying anything about this issue (and how the VAST majority of it has been democrats). Fox did a little bit over the weekend but that's it. How can we combat thousands of extra votes for the dems in key states? This would amount to a coup of our government, in my opinion. I just pray that all the corruption is exposed and somehow multiple voting does not occur.

OC - check your private messages - Is this OC JOW?

2) Bush to let it all hang out at the debate, like..."well, Bob, I know you are for Kerry, against me, but I'll still answer your question. But first let me restate your question in a fair and nuetral manner. That way listeners can have a fair debate."

-- THIS ONE MADE MY NIGHT!!! If only it would happen that way!

I agree - I've been watching Watts since he's been in politics and I would LOVE to see him as VP in '08. Not only is he right on target ideologically, but he's also got great charisma - something the MSM will have a hard time trying to destroy.

PLEASE DON'T MISUNDERSTAND THE MAIN POINT OF MY POST... It's not to whine, but to remind everyone to fight their hearts out against the MSM and the 'Rats all the way through Nov 3. We need to do everything we can. I just want to make sure this one isn't even close!

By the way, I reject the nomination! :)

Hilarious - I agree with you. I thought I was having some kind of bizarre nightmare when I saw the signs exchagned. But it really did happen. And yes, you are right - my neighborhood might not be pathetic but I think at least some of my neighbors are! I'm going to go out and convert them back tomorrow. Wish me well!

Roylene, Did you read my entire post - that was my point - I challenged each of us to go to work for the election of GW Bush at a local level. We need to work hard and tirelessly in the last days leading up until election.

Cobra, I understand your point and agree with you - by no means am I calling all 60s era people libs. I was referring specifically to a possibility that the children of those who ARE libs might be rebelling by being conservative. Just a provocative thought to consider. But again, I do get your point - I appologize if you thought I was calling you a lib just because you were born when you were.

This is great - in Miami and at an MTV ceremony!!! This certainly counters to the "10s of thousands of GOP protesters in NYC."

There might be hope for the next generation after all! Perhaps they are rebelling against their 60s era liberal parents! Imagine that - being a rebel equating to be being conservative.

It will be interesting to see how the 18-25 demographic votes this year.

GO BUSH!!!!!!!!!!!

Kerry is imploding now. Sending people to Bush's ranch, filing the FEC complaint, requesting the book be banned, asking Ashcroft to open a criminal investigation... the objective independent voter will only wonder what Kerry is trying to hide!

I was nervous about this election until this past week or so. But now with all the - um, shall we say "self inflicted wounds" - that Kerry is giving himself now,I feel confident in Bush winning big. Americans - at least a sizeable majority - still don't like cry babies.

He was simply jotting down a pretend list - the list was all Democrats. It was a cut and paste. Zell Miller is with Bush on this one. He signed nothing.

I nominate you as the next Bush speechwriter!