Was television, internet, or holograms prophesied about 2,000 yrs ago in Revelation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter livingwordunity
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

livingwordunity

Guest
“and it was allowed to give breath to the image of the beast so that the image of the beast should even speak, and to cause those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain.” - Revelation 13:15

The key here is that it’s an image that can speak. They didn’t have anything like that back then, but we do now. It’s called TV, internet, or could be a hologram. Does anyone else besides me see it this way?
 
The Bible is a document of faith and morals, and it seems to me that using it to “prove” prophecies about secular things such as modes of communications is not just fraught with peril, it is contrary to the teaching of the Church that we are not supposed to rely on the occult or mediums or psychics for predictions or guidance.

Television, the Internet, and holograms are morally neutral. They are not evil, and they are not intrinsically good. These modes of communication can be used for either purpose, and it is the will of God and the will of His Church that all modes of communication be used for the New Evangelization, to spread the Good News of Jesus Christ to all the world.
 
livingwordunity said:
“and it was allowed to give breath to the image of the beast so that the image of the beast should even speak, and to cause those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain.” - Revelation 13:15

The key here is that it’s an image that can speak. They didn’t have anything like that back then, but we do now. It’s called TV, internet, or could be a hologram. Does anyone else besides me see it this way?
Click to expand...
Absolutely NOT!
The Bible has nothing to do with science or technology.
 
livingwordunity said:
“and it was allowed to give breath to the image of the beast so that the image of the beast should even speak, and to cause those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain.” - Revelation 13:15

The key here is that it’s an image that can speak. They didn’t have anything like that back then, but we do now. It’s called TV, internet, or could be a hologram. Does anyone else besides me see it this way?
Click to expand...
Very interesting conclusion my friend! I have personally had similar interpretations which indicate similar concepts. Here are some concepts for your consideration:

I personally came to interpret Nicolaites as acting in the spirit of mockery. Upon this interpretation, I happened to catch a Nickelodeon show called “Level Up.” Throughout the show, along with its commercials, there was either a general alignment with or play on the script of Revelations, as well as other Doctrines of the Faith, namely the Holy Trinity. In the show and its commercials, there was a character named death, an evil one, a girl in a bikini dancing around (perhaps harlot-like), characters simply wailing in commercials, a character swallowed a flash drive, there were pig-like beasts, three “good guys” united to use one all-powerful weapon, and upon the defeat of the evil, things went back to normal, as well as other alignments. And Nickelodeon is definitely known for its spirit of mockery, and has a similar name to Nicolaitans.

I also personally came to interpret Jezebel as acting in the spirit of materialism/conditionalism/spoiled. The concept is: when one receives so many blessings in life, although the blessings may come from much personal sacrifice, they have also come from the sacrifice of others. When one acts in selfish/materialistic/conditional ways, it can be stated that they are spoiled on the sacrifices of giving people, or “they are drunk on the blood of the saints.” It was at this time, I happened to Google search Jezebel and the first link’s description was “Jezebel is gossip, culture, fashion, and sex for…” I find gossip, fashion, and sex can all be easily abused to the point of selfish spoilage, and are in good alignment with the Revelations description regarding Jezebel.

So, I have personally found a validation to television and internet being prophesied in Revelations.
 
thistle said:
Absolutely NOT!
The Bible has nothing to do with science or technology.
Click to expand...
If part of Revelation is talking about what it will be like on earth near the end of the world why wouldn’t science and technology be seen in the John’s vision along with everything else going on?
 
livingwordunity said:
If part of Revelation is talking about what it will be like on earth near the end of the world why wouldn’t science and technology be seen in the John’s vision along with everything else going on?
Click to expand...
Simple. The book of Revelation isn’t what many people have made to be. 😉
 
Livingwordunity

No one that I know of, has shown specifics in ref. to TV and such, but as far as the wide spread information, some look to Daniel. And if you notice a hundred and fifty years ago no one could imagine how all would see the coming of Christ Jesus to Jerusalem, but now you can watch live from your TV or computer or cell phone what is going on anywhere in the world that is of interest.
 
DPMartin said:
Livingwordunity

No one that I know of, has shown specifics in ref. to TV and such, but as far as the wide spread information, some look to Daniel. And if you notice a hundred and fifty years ago no one could imagine how all would see the coming of Christ Jesus to Jerusalem, but now you can watch live from your TV or computer or cell phone what is going on anywhere in the world that is of interest.
Click to expand...
Those who tell me “no it can’t be that” don’t say what else they think can be described as an image that speaks.
 
livingwordunity said:
“and it was allowed to give breath to the image of the beast so that the image of the beast should even speak, and to cause those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain.” - Revelation 13:15

The key here is that it’s an image that can speak. They didn’t have anything like that back then, but we do now. It’s called TV, internet, or could be a hologram. Does anyone else besides me see it this way?
Click to expand...
Not exactly an answer. But I think it’s best to look at the verse in its context.

And I saw another beast coming up from the land, and it had two horns like a lamb and it was speaking like a dragon, and all the authority of the first beast it exercises before it, and it makes the land and those dwelling in it that they will bow before the first beast whose wound to death was healed, and it does great signs - that fire also it should make to come down from the heaven to the land before men - and it leads astray those dwelling on the land because of the signs that were given it to do before the beast, saying to those dwelling upon the land to make an image to the beast that has the stroke of the sword and lived, and there was given to it to give a spirit to the image of the beast, that also the image of the beast should speak and cause that as many as shall not bow before the image of the beast should be killed.

Looking at contemporary (i.e. late 1st century) imagery, the other beast that comes from the earth evokes the local priests of the imperial cult or the provincial councils responsible for enforcing emperor worship. It was in the Eastern provinces where the imperial cult was very strong, in fact even had a life of its own: centres including Pergamon (“where Satan dwells;” the Christian community there is one of the seven churches), Lesbos and Cyprus offered cult honors to the late Augustus and the empress Livia, and members of the imperial family were linked to various gods.

The second beast receives authority (exousia) from the first beast, just as the first beast had received it from the dragon. If the first beast is a political symbol, the second beast is a religious one: like a prophet who stands in readiness before his god, the second is in the service of the first and exercises exousia in its behalf by promoting the worship of the first beast.

John then describes the second beast with a familiar, established trope in Judaeo-Christian apocalyptic tradition: the performance of signs and wonders to mislead. We can already see the concept applied to “the [false] prophet” in Deuteronomy 13:1, to “false Christs” in Mark 13:22, and to “the lawless one” in 2 Thessalonians 2:9-10. The second beast can make fire come down out of heaven, in a parody of Elijah, and the two witnesses earlier in the book (11:5): as a false Elijah, the second beast heralds the false Messiah. Within a heavily Christianized contemporary Jewish work known as the Ascension of Isaiah is an apocalyptic section known as the ‘Testament of Hezekiah’ (the book’s most overtly Christian portion), we read that at the command of “Beliar the great ruler, the king of this world…the sun will rise at night and he will make the moon to appear at the sixth hour.” (4.2, 5) Another Christianized work known as the Sibylline oracles even has the Antichrist figure being able to raise the dead:

From the great Caesars Beliar shall come
Hereafter, and shall stand on mountain height,
And stay the sea, and the great fiery sun,
And shining moon, and make the dead stand up,
And perform many miracles with men.

The beast who came out of the earth performs its signs not as a religious act, but as a public-relations spectacle “before men.” This again drives home the point of the second beast being a false prophet, whose trademark is to perform signs for self-aggrandizement (Jeremiah 23:9-14; Ezekiel 13:1-23).

The second beast, through its ‘miracles’, are able to sway “those dwelling on the land,” being a tool of Satan, “the deceiver of the whole world.” (12:9) Note that the second beast misleads everyone by “the signs that were given it to do.” This seems to be a case of the so-called ‘divine passive’ (where actions ascribed to God are described in the passive tense): mysteriously, even the second beast operates within the divine plan.
 
(Continued)

The way that “those dwelling upon the land” are misled by the beast stands in clear contrast to the two witnesses: whereas the two witnesses were apparently not accepted by everyone (people even rejoice upon their deaths), here the beast is able to sway all the peoples of the earth by the performance of the very same ‘fire from heaven’ trick.

The second beast then “[says] (λέγων) to those dwelling upon the land” to make an eikona (‘image’ or ‘icon’) of the Beast. This is highly evocative of Daniel 3:5, where Nebuchadnezzar proclaims an order, “saying” (λέγεται in Theodotion’s Greek translation of Daniel) that the nations must worship the ninety-foot golden idol which he had fashioned. The Ascension of Isaiah again notes that Beliar “will set up his image before him in every city.” Eikona is sometimes used to denote the portrait (usually of the emperor) stamped onto currency (cf. Luke 20:24), but here it seems that a bust or statue - more in keeping with cultic practices of the time - is meant.





http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/42/9842-004-614B0B53.jpg



To quote from Leonard L. Thompson’s The Book of Revelation: Apocalypse and Empire:

Different kinds of buildings, shrines, and sanctuaries provided the physical setting of imperial cult. There were freestanding buildings similar in structure to temples to the gods (not heroes, see Price 1984, 156, 163, 165). In and around them might be statues of emperors, imperial iconography, and cult tables for sacrificial offerings (p. 156). Sometimes in a temple to a god or goddess the emperor was recognized through inscriptions, statues, or a separate shrine (p. 147). When the emperor shared cult in a temple to a deity, the emperor was rarely made equal to the god (p. 149). In the temple, statues of the emperor were subordinated to statues of the deity (p. 147); and through various techniques the emperor was made to appear a participant in worshipping the deity rather than an equal (p. 149). Imperial shrines have also been found in a building housing the city council or headquarters for a group of merchants (p. 134). Such shrines link the city or organization of merchants with the emperor. In a large city such as Ephesus there were everywhere physical reminders of the emperor. That city had imperial temples to Roma and Julius Caesar, to Augustus, to the Augusti (see Magie 1950, 572), to Domitian (see Price 1984, 157), and to Hadrian; shrines affiliated with Augustus and Hadrian in connection with an Artemision; a royal portico with statues of Augustus and Livia; and an Antonine altar (Price 1984, 254-257). In addition there were imperial statues in public buildings, on the streets, on fountains, and on city gates (see Price 1984, 135-36). Although these physical presences of the emperor were found throughout a city, they were usually placed in prominent positions, either elevated geographically or at the center of civic life (e.g., Price 1984, 137).
Although not all statues of emperors found throughout a city were objects of cult, those in a sacred place or those used in the special time of festival had a ritual significance. In those cultic settings, icons of the emperor could embody and evoke divine attributes as the emperor in person could not have. For example, one type of imperial statue was constructed overtly after statues of the gods. The emperor in person would never have so evoked the thought of the gods.
Ritual sacrifices of incense, wine, and sometimes a bull were made in connection with imperial images (Price 1984, 188). These sacrifices, like most sacrifices related to the emperor, were for the most part made on behalf of the image of the emperor, not to it (see Price 1984, 188). So an imperial high priest at Aphrodisias “sacrificed to the ancestral gods, offering prayers himself on behalf of the health, safety and eternal duration of their [the emperor’s] rule.” And a woman of the same city and office “sacrificed throughout all the years on behalf of the health of the emperors.” Small statues, metal busts, or painted portraits were also carried in processions at the time of imperial festivals by special officials (sebastophoroi) (see Price 1984, 189-90). Finally, statues also apparently played a part in the imperial mysteries, in which an official (called a sebastophantes) revealed an imperial image at certain critical moments during the ceremonies.
Statues of the emperor were also significant apart from their connection with religious cult. Imperial statues served as places of refuge throughout the empire (Price 1984, 192). Slaves, for example, could flee from their masters by taking refuge at a statue. A prospective buyer of a slave might thus be reassured that the slave was “neither a gambler, nor a thief, nor had he ever fled to [Caesar’s] statue.” Statues also served as a lawful place for paying fines and depositing petitions (Price 1984, 193). Sacrifices might be made to imperial statues by those entering marriage; small statues were set up in private homes; graves were protected by appeal to the imperial presence, or statues were placed in grave sites; and slaves were set free in front of a statue of the emperor (see Price 1984, 119). Statues of the emperor thus had a variety of religious and political-legal significances in the provinces. They were permanent, fixed reminders–or, better, representations–of the emperor and his power.
 
Pagan temples had tons of pagan statues of the gods that “spoke”. The most famous one was Ammon, which made speaking noises when the sun’s light hit the statue. A lot of statues incorporated speaking tubes and such; and many times people went into ecstasy and heard statues speak, whether they did or not.

A nickelodeon was a film machine operated by a nickel.
 

The emperor Domitian (reigned 81-96) granted the city of Ephesus the highly-coveted title of neokoros, ‘temple warden’. In gratitude, the Ephesians built a five-meter high statue in Domitian’s honor, the remnants of which are presently on display at the Ephesus Museum.

Thompson continues:

As evocations of power imperial statues could also reveal divine portents. When Caesar defeated Pompey at Pharsalus, the goddess Victory at Tralles turned towards the statue of Caesar (see Price 1984, 195). The power and cult of the statue may be at play in the Book of Revelation. For example, in Revelation 13:11-18 the beast from the land mirrors the beast from the sea, somewhat as the emperor’s statue mirrors the emperor. The beast from the land also requires that worship and cult be given to the first beast, as the cultic officials in Asia required observances to the emperor. He caused divine portents or signs (Rev. 13:13, cf. 16:14) and required that all people worship the image of the beast. If the worship of the beast and his image in the Book of Revelation is linked to emperor worship, then a fundamental conflict in the book centers upon the true worship of God and his Christ versus the false worship of the emperor and his cult. Price suggests that the “colossal cult statue” of Domitian at Ephesus may specifically have been in John’s mind (Price 1984, 197).
Whatever the exact connection between the “image” of the beast in Revelation and imperial images, the importance of the imperial cult for early Christianity should not be inflated (see Price 1984, 15). The greater issue revolves around Christians’ relation to adherents of traditional religious cults rather than their relation to the cult of the emperor (Price 1984, 125). For example, as we have seen, sacrifices were made in traditional cults on behalf of the emperor. That was expected and required. But Christians rejected all forms of sacrifice: they did not sacrifice to their God either on behalf of the emperor or for any other reason. For Christians, then, sacrificing itself was at stake, not obeisance to the emperor. Price cites only four instances where Christians were asked to sacrifice to the emperor – two of them occurred when the Christian refused to sacrifice to the gods, the others were either on the emperor’s behalf or to his image placed among the statues of the gods (see Price 1984, 221). For the most part, the emperor in the imperial cult was subordinated to the gods, so that the imperial cult could be assimilated to the cult of the gods. For Christians, however, who did not accept the traditional Greek gods and saw them as antithetical to their own religious claims, the imperial cult was rejected as a correlate to the rejection of imperial cults. The forms of traditional Greek religion were central, the imperial cult was secondary to that.

To move on. “And there was given to it to give a spirit to the image of the beast.” Again, this stands in contrast to the two witnesses: just as the “spirit/breath of life” from God (11:11; cf. Genesis 2:7, Ezekiel 37:5, 10) revivifies them, so here does the pneuma “spirit/breath” from the second beast gives life to the image of the first beast.

It is noted here that the images of the first beast could speak. In answer to your (livingwordunity) question: they did have the concept of talking images. In fact, the concept of statues that could talk and perform miracles, and people who could make statues act such, are a staple of ancient literature, and as Mintaka points out, it was possible to give the illusion of idols talking through ventriloquism (which was widely practiced among priests of Oriental cults), some trick device (hiding someone inside a hollow statue, speaking tubes, etc.), or just plain hyperactive imagination.

A Christian legend has it that the infamous Simon Magus brought statues to life Clementine Recognitions 3.47, where Simon claims: “I am the first power, who am always, and without beginning. But having entered the womb of Rachel, I was born of her as a man, that I might be visible to men. I have flown through the air; I have been mixed with fire, and been made one body with it. I have made statues to move; I have animated lifeless things; I have made stones bread; I have flown from mountain to mountain; I have moved from place to place, upheld by angels’ hands, and have lighted on the earth.”) The philosopher Apollonius of Tyana, who lived about the same time as Jesus, was reviled by later Christians as a sorcerer in league with demons: in fact, some early commentators have noted that John was writing during the time when Apollonius was still alive, which kind of perked them up: perhaps Apollonius was able to do tricks such as making inanimate objects come to life as well?

Some commentators think that this nod to Hellenistic ‘magic’ was John’s way of saying that the second beast had given life “into a cultic system so that people believe that images populating the system can actually make a positive economic, social, political, and religious difference in their lives. Those imperial images are supposed to bring them a life of rewards that a reliance upon the lordship of God and Chist could not.” (Brian K. Blount, Revelation: A Commentary)
 
livingwordunity said:
Is that sarcasm? It’s rather disappointing that others don’t seem to be looking into the question I’m asking.
Click to expand...
It isn’t. 🙂 What I am trying to say is: attempting to read Revelation in a rather simplistic and literalistic (as opposed to literal) way, divorced from its original historical (1st century AD) and literary (apocalyptic literature) context, as if the book is just some collection of end-time predictions that refers to events far in the distant future a la Nostradamus, is bound to go haywire. We can’t just crack it open, and attempt to do as some folks do like: “Mark of the Beast = computer chip” or something like that. That to me is a rather unsatisfactory way to approach the text.

I think the ancient adage about “the four senses of Scripture” is very helpful to keep in mind here: the literal sense, and the three categories of the spiritual (allegorical, moral and anagogical), as well as the various subcategories that could fit in these.
 
patrick457 said:
It isn’t. 🙂 What I am trying to say is: attempting to read Revelation in a rather simplistic and literalistic (as opposed to literal) way, divorced from its original historical (1st century AD) and literary (apocalyptic literature) context, as if the book is just some collection of end-time predictions that refers to events far in the distant future a la Nostradamus, is bound to go haywire. We can’t just crack it open, and attempt to do as some folks do like: “Mark of the Beast = computer chip” or something like that. That to me is a rather unsatisfactory way to approach the text.

I think the ancient adage about “the four senses of Scripture” is very helpful to keep in mind here: the literal sense, and the three categories of the spiritual (allegorical, moral and anagogical), as well as the various subcategories that could fit in these.
Click to expand...
Maybe there was a statue at the time that had a tube going through it to make it seem like it spoke, but that doesn’t mean that the same verse can’t also have a future meaning. Look at the woman in Revelation 12. The woman is primarily the Blessed Virgin Mary, but at the same time she can also be a reference to the Church, and she can also be a reference to Israel. And the prophecy of the destruction of the Jewish Temple was also a foreshadowing of the last days of the world. I was under the impression that we are free to interpret the Bible how we see it as long as it doesn’t contradict any doctrines of the Church.
 
livingwordunity said:
Maybe there was a statue at the time that had a tube going through it to make it seem like it spoke, but that doesn’t mean that the same verse can’t also have a future meaning. Look at the woman in Revelation 12. The woman is primarily the Blessed Virgin Mary, but at the same time she can also be a reference to the Church, and she can also be a reference to Israel. And the prophecy of the destruction of the Jewish Temple was also a foreshadowing of the last days of the world. I was under the impression that we are free to interpret the Bible how we see it as long as it doesn’t contradict any doctrines of the Church.
Click to expand...
My point is, much of Revelation seems to be symbolic, in keeping with the ‘apocalyptic literature’ genre. (I mean, swords coming out of the mouth, fantastic monsters appearing from sea and land, eating scrolls, etc.) You can read the visions in a literalistic way if you want to, but IMHO limiting yourself to a literal reading robs the book of its real meaning/s.
 
livingwordunity said:
Those who tell me “no it can’t be that” don’t say what else they think can be described as an image that speaks.
Click to expand...
livingwordunity

Good point, I have forgotten about the part of, image that speaks. Do you remember where that is in scripture?
 
Matthew 24: 30 "And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, **and all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man **coming upon the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

That bolded wording sounds to me like TV, or visual display of that time.

Btw, did we ever think that maybe the image that speaks is maybe a robot? We have the technology for it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top