Is Revelation Heresy?

[aka CAT]

Heresy is defined as “a belief or opinion that does not agree with the official belief or opinion of a particular religion”--Merriam-Webster Dictionary.  The religion, for the purpose of this discussion, is Christianity, though an argument can be made that the Book of Revelation is more in keeping with Judaism.  In fact, it seems that its author, John of Patmos, was yet more Jewish than actually Christian; hence, his predicting that Christ would return as someone other than Himself is appalling to me on the grounds that it is impossible to improve upon absolute Perfection.  Another main reason for my taking exception to the book's inclusion in the New Testament, beyond its contradicting the teachings of Christ, is that it couldn’t be a worse self-fulfilling prophecy in that it’s not only based upon inevitable doom but curses anyone who might even wish to discuss a ‘new Earth,’ i.e. a blessed Earth.

 

There are three main references in this thread.

To give context to the book’s questionable inclusion in any part of the bible is,  

4 big myths of Book of Revelation

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/31/four-big-myths-about-the-book-of-revelation/

inasmuch as "The Book of Revelation has terrified and confused readers for centuries. Few agree on its meaning, but many have opinions."

 

Directly on the subject is 

• WHY THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS HERESY   http://www.revelation-101.org 

 

Lastly, as a flipside to what is dreadful about Revelation,                                                       

• What Is Heaven Like?”                                                           http://www.exploregod.com/what-is-heaven-like

The article directly above is included owing to the part of the Lord’s Prayer that calls for “Thy kingdom come” in terms of “Thy will to be done on Earth as it is in heaven.”  The latter part presumes us free to contemplate heaven on Earth, a ‘new Earth,’ as best we are able.  And, as that pertains to the theme of an NDE that I dared to discuss on this forum, it also hints at my reason for having previously absented myself from UM... 

41 minutes ago, aka CAT said:

and that reason has to do with the first of two promises I made to start this thread.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 8, 2016 by aka CAT

[aka CAT]

39 minutes ago, aka CAT said:

 

 

Edited October 8, 2016 by aka CAT

[jmccr8]

Hi aka CAT,

I don't really see it in the same sense as most I suppose, to me it is about the personal turmoil that we go through, we see those that we love disappear(death) as we grow older until we are alone. The conflicts of our inner being is my armaggedon. I can't impose it onto the world around me as a message of doom, if it were a prophecy then I see the destruction no differently than the flood or Sodom and Gomorrah, god was saving children from certain condemnation into hell because the world was so corrupt that they would not have come to know him.

jmccr8

[aka CAT]

2 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi aka CAT,

I don't really see it in the same sense as most I suppose, to me it is about the personal turmoil that we go through, we see those that we love disappear(death) as we grow older until we are alone. The conflicts of our inner being is my armaggedon. I can't impose it onto the world around me as a message of doom, if it were a prophecy then I see the destruction no differently than the flood or Sodom and Gomorrah, god was saving children from certain condemnation into hell because the world was so corrupt that they would not have come to know him.

jmccr8

Thank you, I am very interested in all perspectives on the subject.  In fact, while I think it was Magnanimus that first tried to convince me that Revelation prophesied a time already past, there are many parts of the OT that foreshadow the NT much in the way that the present portends the future.

[jmccr8]

6 minutes ago, aka CAT said:

Thank you, I am very interested in all perspectives on the subject.  In fact, while I think it was Magnanimus that first tried to convince me that Revelation prophesied a time already past, there are many parts of the OT that foreshadow the NT much in the way that the present portends the future.

That is true there will always be those that endanger humanity and it will be relevant throughout time, wars oppression, lust, and greed are a part of the world we live in.

jmccr8

[SHaYap]

All in all it is something well worth contemplating ...

~

[Magnanimus]

2 hours ago, aka CAT said:

Thank you, I am very interested in all perspectives on the subject.  In fact, while I think it was Magnanimus that first tried to convince me that Revelation prophesied a time already past, there are many parts of the OT that foreshadow the NT much in the way that the present portends the future.

 

It could have happened, be in the middle of happening, or won't happen for another thousand year.

The book is Biblical prophecy--the whole genre is best described as a memory without regard to linear time.  The Seraphim themselves refer to God as the One who was, is, and is to come.  Any assertion on when Revelation takes place is going to be presumptive on our part. 

[quiXilver]

The book of revelations always seemed to me, to have been added for authoritarian convenience.

[aka CAT]

1 hour ago, Magnanimus said:

 

It could have happened, be in the middle of happening, or won't happen for another thousand year.

The book is Biblical prophecy--the whole genre is best described as a memory without regard to linear time.  The Seraphim themselves refer to God as the One who was, is, and is to come.  Any assertion on when Revelation takes place is going to be presumptive on our part. 

The person was Jewish and suggested the author, in words of the first reference, "was actually describing how his own world ended."

[aka CAT]

37 minutes ago, quiXilver said:

The book of revelations always seemed to me, to have been added for authoritarian convenience.

Ill-boding as is most of the book, fear, even if for want of justice at the time, is certainly meant to factor into it.

Edited October 9, 2016 by aka CAT

[SHaYap]

I remember someone mentioning that it was the Catcher in the Rye and Catch 22 of its day ... it was back in my mIRC days ... quite accurate an opinion too I must say ...

~

[aka CAT]

1 minute ago, third_eye said:

I remember someone mentioning that it was the Catcher in the Rye and Catch 22 of its day ... it was back in my mIRC days ... quite accurate an opinion too I must say ...

~

Please elaborate upon the significance of your comparisons.

[SHaYap]

Just now, aka CAT said:

Please elaborate upon the significance of your comparisons.

Not in the literary sense of course ... I don't quite remember how the conversation went as it was so long ago ... but from my understanding it was meant as the iconic representation of the Archetypal and Stereotypical conflicts in the cultural sense of the social ills and mores of its times and age ~

~

[aka CAT]

Thank you.  The Catcher in the Rye metaphor would have totally been lost on me, were it not for the eloquence of your reply.

[SHaYap]

7 minutes ago, aka CAT said:

Thank you.  The Catcher in the Rye metaphor would have totally been lost on me, were it not for the eloquence of your reply.

Ahhh many thanks be to you for I had not realized it till you mentioned it so graciously ...

Its not an easy read to sit through though ... maybe now at my age it would be but back then I was absolutely staggered ~

~

[aka CAT]

50 minutes ago, third_eye said:

Ahhh many thanks be to you for I had not realized it till you mentioned it so graciously ...

Its not an easy read to sit through though ... maybe now at my age it would be but back then I was absolutely staggered ~

~

Actually, it's highly improbable that I'll again "sit through" Catcher in the Rye.

 

The Catch 22 dilemma is more readily understood, given the apocalyptic context.  

Intimidating as is the context, I'm emboldened by such a contradiction especially

when posed as conclusive support of something so crucially to its contrary.  That

such device confuses the Word makes the book of Revelation arguably superfluous.  

 

How is that any different than superstition that is said to sin by excess of religion?

 

 

 

 

Edited October 9, 2016 by aka CAT

[SHaYap]

Just now, aka CAT said:

Actually, it's highly improbable that I'll again "sit through" Catcher in the Rye.

Well now I am tempted to go and have a go at it again ...

Its been so long ago ...

 

Just now, aka CAT said:

The Catch 22 dilemma is more readily understood, given the apocalyptic context.  

Intimidating as is the context, I'm emboldened by such a contradiction especially

when posed as conclusive support of something so crucially to its contrary.  That

such device confuses the Word makes it arguably superfluous.  

Context and the times ... I guess I should say that being in the East I have a somewhat different perspective on how language is rendered and presented ...

What is contradictory to most Western readers is sometimes quite the opposite to me having an Asian up bringing, if I were to pose an example here I would say Sun Tzu's art of War to Western readers ... up to this day there still is many variations as to the translations and hardly any one is quite definitive ~

For the definitive reading one would have to know not only the language but also the customs and traditions that influenced the crystallizing of the ideas back in the day ...

 

Just now, aka CAT said:

How is that any different than superstition that is said to sin by excess of religion?

 

Here to me personally ... excess is the pivotal construct ... religion on its own as its norm of worship and personal dialogue with the divine is hardly ever sin

As for superstition I figured its a case of where and when the tainted desires interjects with the reality of the occasion ... then again I am hardly immune to certain logic of the superstitious nature ... again ... its where the excess begins and the harmless peace of mind ends ...

~

[aka CAT]

8 hours ago, third_eye said:

Well now I am tempted to go and have a go at it again ...

Its been so long ago ...

 

Context and the times ... I guess I should say that being in the East I have a somewhat different perspective on how language is rendered and presented ...

What is contradictory to most Western readers is sometimes quite the opposite to me having an Asian up bringing, if I were to pose an example here I would say Sun Tzu's art of War to Western readers ... up to this day there still is many variations as to the translations and hardly any one is quite definitive ~

For the definitive reading one would have to know not only the language but also the customs and traditions that influenced the crystallizing of the ideas back in the day ...

 

Here to me personally ... excess is the pivotal construct ... religion on its own as its norm of worship and personal dialogue with the divine is hardly ever sin

As for superstition I figured its a case of where and when the tainted desires interjects with the reality of the occasion ... then again I am hardly immune to certain logic of the superstitious nature ... again ... its where the excess begins and the harmless peace of mind ends ...

~

Your renewed enthusiasm for reading The Catcher in the Rye so mystifies me that I am not certain whether you confused the word improbable with its opposite, probable, which lacks a prefix.  Nor, provided your Eastern origin, am I certain of how you can, on one hand, manage eloquence while, on the other hand, seem only somewhat familiar with Western conventions.  The fact is that Westerners, who are probably wiser than I, are reluctant to explore subjects far less delicate than the topic of this thread.

So, after confessing some of the ways in which I have felt divided, maybe my silence is more understandable?  After all, why stick one's neck out over a result that remains unchangeable?  Maybe it is for such a conclusion that you mentioned an art of war?  

Foremost one need be at peace with himself.  

Excess is in contrast to beauty, which is defined in terms of neither too little nor too much.

Peace be with y'all

 

Edited October 10, 2016 by aka CAT

[aka CAT]

28 minutes ago, aka CAT said:

 

 

Edited October 10, 2016 by aka CAT

[SHaYap]

8 hours ago, aka CAT said:

Your renewed enthusiasm for reading The Catcher in the Rye so mystifies me that I am not certain whether you confused the word improbable with its opposite, probable, which lacks a prefix.  

Nahhhh I lack the subtleties here for the confusion, perhaps the probability here is merely for my own bemusement and a rabid desire to revisit an old friend between the covers of a book however improbable that may prove to be ~

 

8 hours ago, aka CAT said:

 

Nor, provided your Eastern origin, am I certain of how you can, on one hand, manage eloquence while, on the other hand, seem only somewhat familiar with Western conventions.  The fact is that Westerners, who are probably wiser than I, are reluctant to explore subjects far less delicate than the topic of this thread.

Now I fear for my sanity

I agree that all things of the mythical nature does bear that scything nature on the probing logic ... I take great care on where I place my foot when the scythe swings at the stalks ... or necks ~

 

8 hours ago, aka CAT said:

So, after confessing some of the ways in which I have felt divided, maybe my silence is more understandable?  After all, why stick one's neck out over a result that remains unchangeable?  Maybe it is for such a conclusion that you mentioned an art of war?  

I fear to tread on such hallowed logic of sanctity ... silence though ever golden, it only glitters as such on the occasions when the glare of scrutiny shines much brighter, caught in the dull dimness of apathy the mute and the held tongue tastes the droplets of honey just as radiant, as just, as it is sweet ~

 

8 hours ago, aka CAT said:

Foremost one need be at peace with himself.  

Or herself ... poor ol' Socrates suffered much sobering slaps from Diotima of Mantineia as often as his logic stumbled to remain humbled ...

 

8 hours ago, aka CAT said:

Excess is in contrast to beauty, which is defined in terms of neither too little nor too much.

Peace be with y'all

 

Beauty to me is unbounded ... by the physical or the material .... nor by weights or measure ... merely by the expanse of a boundless heart ...

~ Peace and greater be to ye as well .... ~

 

[aka CAT]

8 hours ago, third_eye said:

Nahhhh I lack the subtleties here for the confusion, perhaps the probability here is merely for my own bemusement and a rabid desire to revisit an old friend between the covers of a book however improbable that may prove to be ~

 

Now I fear for my sanity

I agree that all things of the mythical nature does bear that scything nature on the probing logic ... I take great care on where I place my foot when the scythe swings at the stalks ... or necks ~

 

I fear to tread on such hallowed logic of sanctity ... silence though ever golden, it only glitters as such on the occasions when the glare of scrutiny shines much brighter, caught in the dull dimness of apathy the mute and the held tongue tastes the droplets of honey just as radiant, as just, as it is sweet ~

 

Or herself ... poor ol' Socrates suffered much sobering slaps from Diotima of Mantineia as often as his logic stumbled to remain humbled ...

 

Beauty to me is unbounded ... by the physical or the material .... nor by weights or measure ... merely by the expanse of a boundless heart ...

~ Peace and greater be to ye as well .... ~

 

Contrariness doesn’t especially bother me when it comes to personal druthers, e.g. re: The Catcher in the Rye - The book, as I remember it, might as well have been entitled Murphy’s Law, since just about everything went wrong for the protagonist.

Fatigue often causes me to question things that I ordinarily take for granted, e.g. your mastery of the English language.  What about your previous post caused me to believe you borrowing words for lack of such proficiency is beyond me, but I felt compelled to more compassionately take into account our cultural differences.  Nonetheless, the misunderstanding was mine.

Call me dim, but I’m not apathetic.  Nor need you any excuse to take liberty in waxing poetic, “I fear to tread on such hallowed logic of sanctity ... silence though ever golden, it only glitters as such on the occasions when the glare of scrutiny shines much brighter, caught in the dull dimness of apathy the mute and the held tongue tastes the droplets of honey just as radiant, as just, as it is sweet.”

I defined beauty in earthly terms for, here, too much most anything is surfeit, e.g. much as we need oxygen, too much of it can be explosive or, in an incubator, prove blinding.  Less and less am I concerned with physical beauty wherefrom the tiniest flaw or something’s being centimeters too large, too small or off center detracts from what is mere illusion anyway.  Of course, what has heart is meaningfully worthwhile and there can never truly be too much good.

0:-) MGby.

 

[SHaYap]

1 hour ago, aka CAT said:

Contrariness doesn’t especially bother me when it comes to personal druthers, e.g. re: The Catcher in the Rye - The book, as I remember it, might as well have been entitled Murphy’s Law, since just about everything went wrong for the protagonist.

Fatigue often causes me to question things that I ordinarily take for granted, e.g. your mastery of the English language.  What about your previous post caused me to believe you borrowing words for lack of such proficiency is beyond me, but I felt compelled to more compassionately take into account our cultural differences.  Nonetheless, the misunderstanding was mine.

Call me dim, but I’m not apathetic.  Nor need you any excuse to take liberty in waxing poetic, “I fear to tread on such hallowed logic of sanctity ... silence though ever golden, it only glitters as such on the occasions when the glare of scrutiny shines much brighter, caught in the dull dimness of apathy the mute and the held tongue tastes the droplets of honey just as radiant, as just, as it is sweet.”

I defined beauty in earthly terms for, here, too much most anything is surfeit, e.g. much as we need oxygen, too much of it can be explosive or, in an incubator, prove blinding.  Less and less am I concerned with physical beauty wherefrom the tiniest flaw or something’s being centimeters too large, too small or off center detracts from what is mere illusion anyway.  Of course, what has heart is meaningfully worthwhile and there can never truly be too much good.

0:-) MGby.

 

I am humbled by your grace ...

> I bow <

~

[aka CAT]

On October 10, 2016 at 4:50 PM, third_eye said:

I am humbled by your grace ...

> I bow <

~

Bow before God alone.

The first couple of articles helped me come to terms with an inner conflict.  That was reason enough to share them.  I cherish the memory of what seemed to be, during an NDE, a heavenly place.  And, while there are no guarantees in this life, maybe I'll see you there one day.

 

 

 

[SHaYap]

4 hours ago, aka CAT said:

Bow before God alone.

The first couple of articles helped me come to terms with an inner conflict.  That was reason enough to share them.  I cherish the memory of what seemed to be, during an NDE, a heavenly place.  And, while there are no guarantees in this life, maybe I'll see you there one day.

 

... being Omnipotent ... is that why the penitent are constantly bowed I wonder ... ?

We Asians bow to almost anything ... does not mean we bow willingly or willy nilly though ...

Reminds me of that little ditty about a Jewish farmer in France I believe during WWII ...

when the Nazis overran his farm and declared 'Everything belongs to the Third Reich' the family quietly acquiesced ...

when came the day the farm was liberated he walked up to the Nazi Commander and said "No"

~

THat's the thing about conflicts ... inner or outer ... the roots and the branches ... generally its all words pulling at our actions like the strings pulls at the puppets

and the ones pulling the strings are the ghosts of the long ghostly thoughts of our forefathers and mothers ... our minds are full of their voices ...

~

Which brings me back to my personal question of God ... I find that whenever I desperately need God/s or a God to do something for me that's when he/she/they are hardly to be found

I guess that is part of the no guarantees clause or the void for avoidance ... or God/gods are not there to do our work but are there to ensure we do ours ...

fact of the matter is if such a phantasmal entity appeared before me with a 'your Wish is my command"  my first thought would be 'Begone"

~

At my age, on the occasions that I realized it was death knocking at my door ... it was mostly after the fact ... so I guess my brushes with NDE was lost on me ... 

I guess that's my 'ignorance is bliss' moments ...

~

> curtsy <

[Jor-el]

On 10/8/2016 at 11:05 PM, aka CAT said:

Heresy is defined as “a belief or opinion that does not agree with the official belief or opinion of a particular religion”--Merriam-Webster Dictionary.  The religion, for the purpose of this discussion, is Christianity, though an argument can be made that the Book of Revelation is more in keeping with Judaism.  In fact, it seems that its author, John of Patmos, was yet more Jewish than actually Christian; hence, his predicting that Christ would return as someone other than Himself is appalling to me on the grounds that it is impossible to improve upon absolute Perfection.  Another main reason for my taking exception to the book's inclusion in the New Testament, beyond its contradicting the teachings of Christ, is that it couldn’t be a worse self-fulfilling prophecy in that it’s not only based upon inevitable doom but curses anyone who might even wish to discuss a ‘new Earth,’ i.e. a blessed Earth.

 

There are three main references in this thread.

To give context to the book’s questionable inclusion in any part of the bible is,  

4 big myths of Book of Revelation

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/31/four-big-myths-about-the-book-of-revelation/

inasmuch as "The Book of Revelation has terrified and confused readers for centuries. Few agree on its meaning, but many have opinions."

 

Directly on the subject is 

• WHY THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS HERESY   http://www.revelation-101.org 

 

Lastly, as a flipside to what is dreadful about Revelation,                                                       

What Is Heaven Like

 http://www.exploregod.com/what-is-heaven-like

The article directly above is included owing to the part of the Lord’s Prayer that calls for “Thy kingdom come” in terms of “Thy will to be done on Earth as it is in heaven.”  The latter part presumes us free to contemplate heaven on Earth, a ‘new Earth,’ as best we are able.  And, as that pertains to the theme of an NDE that I dared to discuss on this forum, it also hints at my reason for having previously absented myself from UM... 

 

Hi aka CAT, 

Revelation is not hard to decipher. What one has to accept is that it was purposefully written as such. 

The key to decrypting is provided though, it is the rest of the bible.

The problem of whether it is heresy is almost as old as the Church. The early church did not welcome nor appreciate the book.

It was hard to understand from their gentile perspective. It was relegated to metaphor or allegory and was ultimately ignored for almost 2000 years. Only in the last 300 years or so has it become the focus of actual study.

It is a book that placed the church in a difficult position when it explicitly condemned the church in its involvement with authority and later as temporal ruler of the Roman Empire.

Hence the move to discredit it and ultimately to ignore it.

Edited October 12, 2016 by Jor-el