Re: Understanding The Book of Revelation

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Pat Kohli at
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 27/11/03 3:33 am:
> 
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > 
> >> Inclosed are two different interpretations of the same verses (on
>  the
> >> three woes) from the Book of Revelation. First interpretation is
>  Bahai
> >> and the latter is Christian. So how do Baha'is know their prophesy
>  is
> >> true and Christians over the past thousands of years are so stupid
> >> they cant even understand their Bible until some Persian like
>  Abdu'l
> >> Baha came along to explain it to them?.................Errol
> > 
> > "But a serious part of this concept is that the older an
> > interpretation of Prophecy is, the less likely it is to be
> > true. Correct understanding will be given only in the
> > "time of the end". Which is why so many expositors of
> > Prophecy have already been proven wrong by history,
> > which you can see if you really examine what they say
> > in the light of history."
> > 
> >> 
> >> http://www.be-ready.org/bookof.html
> > 
> > Maybe you could read the links _before_ you post them, even though you might
> > prefer to be read to?
> > 
> > Oddly, your link faltered after that, saying that the judgement of God (the
> > woe) would be an outpouring of wrath?
> > 
> > Then it gets really speculative, proposing,
> > "Newsdate: Some time in the next 50 years: A News flash goes out to the entire
> > world.
> > Astronomers have discovered an asteroid (or comet) on a collision course with
> > the earth.  And it's too late to do anything about it! That group of 
> > scientists
> > who thought that we should build a defense system to protect ourselves from
> > such catastrophes have a short time in which to say, "We told you so!"
> > Astronomers hastily plot the course of the object and predict an impact in the
> > mid-Pacific Ocean. Astrophysicists try to calculate the force of the coming
> > impact, and thus predict the extent of the disaster. They are horrified by 
> > what
> > their numbers tell them."
> > 
> > It started so well, and then it borrowed from Hollywood.  Oh well(!)
>  
> I see you were quite good at analysing and making fun of one of these
> interpretations Pat,  yet snipped the Bahai one out. Are you ashamed
> that Abdul Baha wrote such nonsense, did he borrow it from 
> Bollywood?.
> 
> Errol 
> 
> 11: COMMENTARY ON THE ELEVENTH CHAPTER OF THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN  
> Some Answered Question Pages 44-61
> 
> "The first woe is the appearance of the Prophet, Muhammad, the son of
> `Abdu'lláh--peace be upon Him! The second woe is that of the Báb--to
> Him be glory and praise! The third woe is the great day of the
> manifestation of the Lord of Hosts and the radiance of the Beauty of
> the Promised One"
> http://www.ibiblio.org/Bahai/Texts/EN/SAQ/SAQ-11.html


He did that because there was nothing further to be said on
the matter.

The burden of the reply was to point out, that yet one more
time you have provided a reference in "support" of your
wild assertions, that in fact undermines your own position.

This:

"But a serious part of this concept is that the older an
> > interpretation of Prophecy is, the less likely it is to be
> > true. Correct understanding will be given only in the
> > "time of the end". Which is why so many expositors of
> > Prophecy have already been proven wrong by history,
> > which you can see if you really examine what they say
> > in the light of history."

Contradicts *this*:

"So how do Baha'is know their prophesy is
true and Christians over the past thousands of years are so stupid
they cant even understand their Bible until some Persian like
Abdu'l Baha came along to explain it to them?"

Besides the fact that Baha'is, unlike Errols, don't
go around calling Christians "stupid" for believing
in Jesus.

btw - have you found the part in Blake's Seven yet where
Dr Kelly is called a traitor?  Was it Tarrant who did
that?  Or maybe Soolin or Servalan?

Paul