Religious Prophecy (Religion)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Monday, September 13, 2010, 20:50 (5185 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

Balance_Maintained,
> > 
> > If I were a religious man in this day and age, I can honestly say the hermetic path would definitely be the one I would take. Have you ever had a pop at Sacred Geometry? Sadly I haven't but I've been using what little I HAVE found in a novel I started on a couple years back. 
> > 
> 
> I well and truly hate the term 'religious'. It carries that negative connotation of organized theology which to me is antithetical to learning and wisdom. If you like esoteric teaching, check out 'The Secret Teachings of All Ages' by Manly P. Hall 1928. It is a wonderful encyclopedia of information that, while extremely informative, is not preachy or overly biased.
> -I think you dislike organized religion a little too much, but that's alright--I've been there. I'm a huge fan of Esoteric thought, and much of the best of it came right around that period of time that the book you mention later. I'm very interested in those that practice altered states of consciousness (w/o drugs or alcohol). -> > > 
> > 
> > The analysis is excellent and well-said; but it doesn't answer my deeper question of how are we to know what is the correct interpretation? Picking on Daniel again, what from the 4 gospels fulfils Daniel's prophecies regarding the "Son of Man?" To me, there simply is too much interpretation going on here. Someone here quoted Thomas Paine recently... something like "Only the person who receives the revelation acquires knowledge... everyone else from the 2nd, 3rd, ... nth telling gets secondhand hearsay." 
> > 
> 
> Well, I would say the best way to interpret this, unfortunately, is to look at it in hindsight. A possibility now more than it has ever been in history. A really great book on this was Revelation: A Grand Climax produced by the JW's. I didn't 100% agree with their interpretation, but to be fair, they have made revisions as they learn more, so at least they aren't claiming infallible wisdom or knowledge.
> -The hindsight thing; that's why I don't trust prophecy. In hindsight we can always bend events to fit the prophecy, like the false Nostradamus here:-http://urbanlegends.about.com/cs/historical/a/nostradamus.htm-> > At any rate, 1:20 and 1:21 together comprise an opposing viewpoint to my own, if for no other reason than the failed prophecy in Ezekiel that I mentioned. "The one true God" wouldn't say he would do something and then not deliver. 
> > 
> Reading over Ezekial again for a refresher... It's been a while
> -Scan for the city "Tyre." In one chapter it is to bloodily fall to Nebuchadnezzar, (God is saying so) and in about 3-4 chapters later Nebuchadnezzar "leaves without his wages." Tyre was successful against the wrath of God!-> > Going back to my main point, how are we to trust prophecy when we are so culturally and linguistically distant from the prophet(s) that we cannot begin to comprehend them? Going back to the time before canonization, to the 30yrs after Christ's death, if John thought that his revelation was meant to talk about Rome, than who are we to say that his revelation is for today? Shouldn't John's interpretation supercede ours? 
> > 
> > Or what about all the "Fufilled prophecies" marking the "end of days" at AD 1000? Or how about the Mayans stating that the world was going to end in 600AD? (don't get me started on 2012...)
> > 
> That would have been an interpretation wouldn't it? Most prophecies are vague by nature. 
> -But again, without access to the "correct" interpretation, how can we even bother? -> 
> 
> The problems I have with the Catholic Church are many, but I would not say I hate them. I think pity would be more of an appropriate term. Like I say about science, they have let their arrogance get the best of them, and have forgotten that the very first lesson in the Bible is actually about humility. In fact, nearly every religion has as their first lesson, humility. And, contrary to popular criticism, it is not because they want to subjugate the worshipers (though it may have evolved into that later) but because without humility your mind is closed.
> -That's kinda what I'm referring to: at this time they were as humble as you could be, because they were fighting for their very existence... only after Constantine, and the tables being turned did things start becoming--I'll go so far as to say "evil." -> 
> I use the netbible.org, primarily because as far as I know, it has no direct affiliation with any major religious organization and the translators notes are clear and concise, not only presenting varying viewpoints on a translation, but explaining the linguistic rules constructs used in his own.-I use www.biblegateway.com for its easy access to multiple translations. It's amazing the difference an edition can make, like comparing Deut 22:28-29 between ASV, NKJV, and NIV, and on, and on... Which interpretation here? One leads to what I would call injustice, another seems reasonable.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"