-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
T
Therapon
Guest
I am of the opinion that Islam turned from the the worship of the true God to worshiping the same "moon goddess" the ancient Jews did . . . .
Jeramiah 44:16-18 "As for the word that thou hast spoken unto us in the name of Jehovah, we will not hearken unto thee. But we will certainly perform every word that is gone forth out of our mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink-offerings unto her, as we have done, we and our fathers, our kings and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem; for then had we plenty of victuals, and were well, and saw no evil. But since we left off burning incense to the queen of heaven, and pouring out drink-offerings unto her, we have wanted all things, and have been consumed by the sword and by the famine."
Again, in my opinion, the god of Islam is that same evil spirit.
L
Laodicea
Guest
We are clearly told who the beasts are in Daniel 8, there is no guess work.
Daniel 8:20-21 KJV
(20) The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.
(21) And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.
To say that it is not those nations mentioned is to clearly put your own interpretation into it.
No one is deceived by Islam, except the Muslims themselves. That religion is blatantly against Christ, just like many other religions are. They are not the end times antichrist mentioned, where there will be a man of sin/son of perdition.
Satan is a deceiver. If we look at his characteristics we can see he transforms himself into a holy angel of light. He wears a mask of holiness so that he is not easily detected. He would not show up and wave at everyone
Islam is a tool though. Since Satan is the prince of this world you can see his characteristics everywhere. Where there is blatant evil, it can create fear in people and have them running into the arms of a 'savior' to rescue them from it.
Rome has many parts. I believe the religious aspect is the whore, but that leaves the other sides..
Satan is a deceiver. If we look at his characteristics we can see he transforms himself into a holy angel of light. He wears a mask of holiness so that he is not easily detected. He would not show up and wave at everyone
Islam is a tool though. Since Satan is the prince of this world you can see his characteristics everywhere. Where there is blatant evil, it can create fear in people and have them running into the arms of a 'savior' to rescue them from it.
Rome has many parts. I believe the religious aspect is the whore, but that leaves the other sides..
"The seven heads are seven hills on which the woman sits."
If you are implying that Rev 17 speaks of the Roman Catholic Church, understand that Vatican Hill (Latin Collis Vaticanus) is northwest of the Tiber and is NOT one of the Seven Hills of Rome. Likewise, the Pincian Hill (Latin Mons Pincius), to the north, and the Janiculum Hill (Latin Ianiculum), to the west, are not counted among the traditional Seven Hills.
Of the Seven Hills of current Rome, five (Aventine, Caelian, Esquiline, Quirinal and Viminal hills) are populated with monuments, buildings, and parks. The Capitoline now hosts the Municipality of Rome, and the Palatine Hill is an archaeological area. Note that the Vatican hill is not one of the “seven hills” of Rome, as it is located on the opposite side of the river Tiber. So the association of the Roman papacy as the woman is not a strong argument.
I am not saying that is necessarily what you were implying. Just saying.
Often the 7 hills of the book of Revelation are assigned to Rome. So is this the only option?
NO.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
List of cities claimed to be built on seven hills:
Amman, Jordan
Asunción, Paraguay
Bath, England
Cincinnati, OH United States
Edinburgh, Scotland
Istanbul, Turkey
Jerusalem, Israel
Kampala, Uganda
Lisbon, Portugal
Moscow, Russia
Nevada City, United States
Prague, Czech Republic, said to be built on seven or nine hills: Hradčany, Vítkov, (Opyš), Větrov, Skalka, (Emauzy), Vyšehrad, Karlov and Petřín
Providence, Rhode Island, built on Christian Hill, College Hill, Constitution Hill, Federal Hill, Smith Hill, Tockwotten Hill, and Weybosset Hill.
Rome, Italy (not including Vatican hill which is located on the opposite side of the river Tiber.)
Saint-Etienne, France
Seattle, United States
Sheffield, England
Tirumala, India
Worcester, Massachusetts, United States
Plovdiv, Bulgaria
Ceuta , Morocco
If you are implying that Rev 17 speaks of the Roman Catholic Church, understand that Vatican Hill (Latin Collis Vaticanus) is northwest of the Tiber and is NOT one of the Seven Hills of Rome. Likewise, the Pincian Hill (Latin Mons Pincius), to the north, and the Janiculum Hill (Latin Ianiculum), to the west, are not counted among the traditional Seven Hills.
Of the Seven Hills of current Rome, five (Aventine, Caelian, Esquiline, Quirinal and Viminal hills) are populated with monuments, buildings, and parks. The Capitoline now hosts the Municipality of Rome, and the Palatine Hill is an archaeological area. Note that the Vatican hill is not one of the “seven hills” of Rome, as it is located on the opposite side of the river Tiber. So the association of the Roman papacy as the woman is not a strong argument.
I am not saying that is necessarily what you were implying. Just saying.
Often the 7 hills of the book of Revelation are assigned to Rome. So is this the only option?
NO.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
List of cities claimed to be built on seven hills:
Amman, Jordan
Asunción, Paraguay
Bath, England
Cincinnati, OH United States
Edinburgh, Scotland
Istanbul, Turkey
Jerusalem, Israel
Kampala, Uganda
Lisbon, Portugal
Moscow, Russia
Nevada City, United States
Prague, Czech Republic, said to be built on seven or nine hills: Hradčany, Vítkov, (Opyš), Větrov, Skalka, (Emauzy), Vyšehrad, Karlov and Petřín
Providence, Rhode Island, built on Christian Hill, College Hill, Constitution Hill, Federal Hill, Smith Hill, Tockwotten Hill, and Weybosset Hill.
Rome, Italy (not including Vatican hill which is located on the opposite side of the river Tiber.)
Saint-Etienne, France
Seattle, United States
Sheffield, England
Tirumala, India
Worcester, Massachusetts, United States
Plovdiv, Bulgaria
Ceuta , Morocco
Last edited:
A
Abiding
Guest
C
cfultz3
Guest
L
Laodicea
Guest
Yes there have been many cities with Seven Hills mentioned But the 7 Mountains are symbolic not literal.
Revelation 17:9-10 KJV
(9) And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.
(10) 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.
A
Abiding
Guest
the ones who did
Do I win a prize?
rabbi scribe slaves of Mohammad
whatever value that has.
I
iamthelordsforever
Guest
However, that is what you are doing. You have taken one verse and used that verse to interpret the whole of Scripture, purely on a speculation that Jesus was telling John to use what he saw in the past as opposed to what he was currently seeing. All of Revelations is writing about things in the future. That is the truth and anybody who says otherwise is trying to fit Scripture to his particular views. We are not living in the Millennium, considering the fact that Jesus is not here and actively ruling from Jerusalem. Please do not confuse Christians who have not studied Scriptures closely. Sir.
T
Therapon
Guest
It's never wise to make such a bold statement when it goes directly against a verse in the Bible like Rev 1:19, but I have absolutly no desire to disturb your faith. Go in peace.
T
Therapon
Guest
After the famous battle of Aqraba in 632 AD, during the Caliphate of Abu Bakr, many Muslims who knew the Koran by heart were killed. As a result, Umar B. Al-Khattab advised Abu Bakr of the need to compile the Koran into a standardized text. Abu Bakr ordered the compilation to be made by Zaid Ibn Thabit from inscriptions on palm leaves, stones and from the remaining reciters.
When the compilation was done, it was kept by Abu Bakr until his death. His successor, Umar, then took custody of it. Afterward, it came into the possession of Hafsa, one of Muhammad’s widows (a daughter of Umar). The companions of the prophet also did their own compilations and produced other manuscripts for use in various provinces. There were four rival provinces, each using a different text of the Koran.
During the reign of Khalif Uthman (the third Khalifah), reports reached him that in various parts of Syria, Armenia and Iraq, Muslims were reciting the Koran differently from the way it was being recited by Arabian Muslims. Uthman immediately sent for the manuscript in Hafsa’s possession and ordered Zaid Ibn Thabit and three others, Abdullah Ibn Zubair, Said Ibn Al-As and Abdullah Al-Rahman Ibn Harith B. Hisham to make copies of the text and make corrections where necessary. When these were completed, we read that Uthman took violent action regarding other existing Koranic manuscripts:
"Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied and ordered that all the other koranic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts, whole copies, to be burnt." (Sahih al-Bukhari Vol. 6 Page 479).
To eliminate variant readings and contradictions, all other manuscripts were indeed burned, but the Uthmanic edition itself was not perfect and met with a similar fate. When Marwan was governor of Medina, he ordered Hafsa’s manuscript to be destroyed. The only reasonable conclusion one can have is that during Uthman’s time, some of the contradictions in Hafsa’s text were so glaring that a total destruction of it was called for rather than a revision. From then until now, conflicting passages and historical inaccuracies exist within the Koranic texts.
Contrary to Muslim belief, there were more than just language differences between Uthman’s text and the texts which were ordered to be burned. In every case, there were considerable verbal differences between them and the text Uthman determined (by whim) to be the final standardized version of the Koran. These differences were real textual variants and not just language peculiarities as is often taken for granted. In several cases there were words and sentences found in some codices that were missing in others. In other instances, the variants concerned whole clauses and consonantal variants in certain words.
Evidence abounds to this day, that verses, indeed whole passages are missing from the Koran that is in circulation today. For instance, the second Khalifah, Khalif Umar, stated in his life-time that certain verses prescribing stoning for adultery were recited by Prophet Muhammad himself as part of the Koran:
"God sent Muhammad and sent down the scripture to him. Part of what he sent down was the passage on stoning. We read it, we were taught it, and we heeded it. The apostle stoned and we stoned after him. I fear that in time to come men will say that they find no mention of stoning in God’s book and thereby go astray in neglecting an ordinance which God has sent down. Verily, stoning in the book of God is a penalty laid on married men and women who commit adultery." (Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasulullah p. 684)
The verse on stoning, no longer to be found in the Koran, is incontrovertible proof that the Koran as it stands today is not the same as the one spoken by Muhammad. What the public does not know is that Jihad has many faces. Jihad is not just slaughtering people for Islam, but it is also a systematic suppression of truth and propagation of lies.
T
Therapon
Guest
There have been many revisions and corrections made to what we now know as the Koran. If memory serves (and that is gertting worse by the day), the defrocked monk who first wrote down much of it was named Marino, which is why the Koran contains bits of Jewish fables and early monastic beliefs. The first Muslim scribe to compile the Koran was an Arab named Zaid Ibn Thabit.
T
Therapon
Guest
It's facinating to watch people conclude on a whim that some verses are literal while others are symbolic. So in Revelation 17, these seven mountains are symbolic, but just three chapters away, in Revelation 20, those thousand years, they have to be literal. ROTHLMHO!!!
In my humble opinion, that is called manipulating Scripture to fit our doctrines.
Last edited by a moderator:
A
Abiding
Guest
"the City of Jerusalem as it existed in that time was also reckoned to be the "City of Seven Hills." This fact was well recognized in Jewish circles. In the Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer, an 8th century midrashic narrative (section 10), the writer mentioned without commentary (showing that the understanding was well known and required no defense) that "Jerusalem is situated on seven hills" (recorded in The Book of Legends, edited by Bialik and Ravnitzky, p. 371, paragraph 111).
And, so it was. Those "seven hills" are easy to identify.
If one starts with the Mount of Olives just to the east of the main City of Jerusalem (but still reckoned to be located within the environs of Jerusalem), there are three summits to that Mount of Olives:
The northern summit (hill) is called Scopus [Hill One],
The middle summit (hill) was called Nob [Hill Two],
The highest point of Olivet itself, and the southern summit (hill) was called in the Holy Scriptures the "Mount of Corruption" or "Mount of Offence" [Hill Three] (II Kings 23:13).
On the middle ridge between the Kedron and the Tyropoeon Valleys there was (formerly) in the south "Mount Zion" [Hill Four] (the original "Mount Zion" and not the later southwest hill that was later called by that name),
The "Ophel Mount" [Hill Five],
To the north of that the "Rock" around which "Fort Antonia" was built [Hill Six],
And finally, there was the southwest hill itself [Hill Seven] that finally became known in the time of Simon the Hasmonean as the new "Mount Zion."
This makes "Seven Hills" in all.
Is Jerusalem set on seven hills? - Yahoo! Answers < click
Revelation 11:8
Their bodies will lie in the street of the great city, which is figuratively called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified.
T
Therapon
Guest
Yeah, that sounds right. It's been years since I read about Marino, our defrocked friend, so I just don't remember more.
I
iamthelordsforever
Guest
I'm sorry but, unfortunately, the Bible specifically says they are symbolic. However, the 1,000 is never said to be symbolic. I fail to see that Satan is bound in chains as we speak, so the Millennium has not started, as well as Jesus ruling in Jerusalem. But, from my experience, those who preach false doctrines, will never change, even when shown the errors in their theories. Our generations is falling further and further into apostasy, just as Jesus said would happen toward the end of the Church Age. I am so sorry that you can not embrace the 'Blessed Hope' that is the Rapture.
A