The Debate of God.

[EnochSDP]

No one can provide physical proof and no one can discredit faith.So how can we convince people that God exist?We can't, all we can do is provide the facts from both sides to conclude that it is one or the other.Because truthfully if one is correct then it causes the other to be incorrect, so we need to find which is most likely true by the facts.
There are billions of people who want evidence that God exist!First off it is impossible to prove God does or does not exist if the debator has taken a perticular view and can not accept change.If a person opposes even the possibility that there is or isnt a God, then they will try to explain away any evidence proposed.
People also need to face the fact that our impression of science and nature is limited to our worldy view.The fact is that our view in this world is physical and a infinate God is beyond the physical.Because the human mind is limited in knowledge we often struggle with most things that are physical.So with that we really can not expect to know much about our spiritual understanding.We must be careful not to allow our thinking to lead us away from truth.
Man's knowledge of creation in and out of this planet have many traits that lead to being designed.There are many who claim there is no evidence of God, though the actual fact is that the evidence is overwhelming that there is a Creator.
Obtainable information is at anyone's fingertips to prove that the existence of God is far more supported than all the theories made by science.God has evidence from the Bible, archaeology, history, science, and the Shroud of Turin to validate what was said within the Bible.Alot of people accept alot less from the big bang theory and science.Then science wants us to accept thier theories on faith with the actual provable evidence to be discovered later.
The process of science in its nature is to fail.In that failure causes results that therefore gains more knowledge to make more precise calulations.This process is helpful cause it produces results to improve but it is in the fact that science fails and can not provide 100% accuracy that causes a problem.So in essence science has to fail to even procede further!Most believers agree that God exspands beyond the aspects of science as we have learned it.
I will not bore you with mathematical equations because truthfully we can not equate such things.It is beyond our mathmatical knowledge to even know what to calculate.I can only present hypotheticals and facts that anyone can relate to, to prove God exist.So with that said let us take a good look at alot of reasons why our creation seems designed.
The simple fact is anyone can physically see that things do not appear from thin air in our world.That is because we are in a physical state and since this topic also concerns the physical state then it is important.From a physical state it is highly unlikely that life did not come from another source of life.To suggest life developed from lifelessness is to suggest that there was nothing at a point and that unintelligent matter became thinking life.It does not take much intelligence to know something does not come from nothing.Intelligence does not come from the unintelligent.
Intelligence in the classical sense means 'rationality,'People able to think beyond the limits of the physical world cannot come from unitelligence.Information is known as intelligence, when we consider this, then our entire body is information and cannot come from unintelligence.
We can take facts that we see in nature and still draw the wrong conclusions about them.It is probably suprising to the public to know that most scientific theories are mathematically impossible.Why do people accept this?It is because people do not want to face the fact that they will have to answer to a Creator one day for thier lack of faith.People want a tight grip on thier lives.They want to find a reason for thier existance with something they can actually see or touch.
Most people ignore the visable signs that a intelligent designer exist even though the evidence is staggering.You only need to look carefully at any life form to gain some respect for the complexity of it.Some examples are: earth's perfect distance from the sun, the human brain, DNA, the human body, order in the universe, intelligent differences in humans and animals, animals body chemistry, the amount of people who testify of God, and the amount of people who oppose a God who supposedly does not exist.
You can not find precise instruction like our universe without intent.With all of modern man's accumulated knowledge, advanced tools, and experience, we are still absolutely overwhelmed at the complexities of our life.
Why is the universe so orderly?How is it so orderly?The greatest scientist are in disbelief at these questions.There is no logical reason for a universe that obeys rules.The universe does not have to behave this way because of the conditions in space.Though it is not so much orderly than it is obedient.That is, having the laws that govern our universe are ultimately required otherwise life would have ceased.Here on earth we are also bound by rules of law and physics.
examples of order in the universe.
The Earth's size is perfect.If the Earth were smaller then an atmosphere would not be possible.If the Earth was bigger it would contain free hydrogen like Jupiter.We are the only planet with the right mixture of gases and a atmosphere to have planet, animal, and human life.The Earth is located the perfect distance from the sun.If we were any further away we would freeze and if we were any closer we would burn.The Earth remains this perfect distance from the sun while rotating around the sun.By the Earth rotating on its axis allows the entire surface of the earth to be properly warmed and cooled.
Our moon is perfect for the Earth creating ocean tides and movement so ocean waters do not stagnate.While also being in perfect distance from our gravitational pull.
The more scientists study life, the more they become impressed by it.Nature is full of intricate designs and beauty.This is in contrast to man made objects, which look, corose and crude.Materialist believe life in all its amazing forms consists merely of atoms and molecules.They believe these atoms and molecules formed themselves into millions of intricate animals and planets.Even if nature could have originally built the proteins and enzymes used by living organisms, thats not just it, it takes much more.Life could never have come into being without some form of highly intelligent reason.
However, none of the life forms we know can surpass the overall complexity of the human being.Each person is constructed of cells forming trillions of connections.The marvels in the bodies of both animals and man are endless.In addition to this is the fact all the information is available for genes to repair the body when it is hurt.It is certainly true that we are like a machine carefully made by a craftsman.And like anything created, we reflect the existance of our creator.
Human beings are the only species in the known history of the world to have emotions.Emotions cause people to laugh, imagine, believe, have morals, and have manners.Animals do not even have the desire to cloth themselves.
People pocesses the ability to know both good and evil.You can look at this in many ways, positive and negative, God and the devil, right and wrong, harmony and destruction, peace and war, and we can go on with the opposites.The knowledge of good and evil appears to be divine.The ability to decide how to accomplish what you want by either good or evil, is not a ability any animal on earth pocesses other than man.Our intelligence and natural abilities hints to a divine authorship but it is your decision to decide that.
The design of the human brain is truely awesome.The human brain processes an amazing amount of information.The human brain processes more than a million messages a second.The brain functions differently than any other organ.It has the intelligent ability to reason, feel, dream, plan, react, relate, and decide.Something so complex could not of been created without design.
Well where did the life come from to create us?The arguement that The Creator must have a creator also is not a nessesary requirement."God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands."Acts 17:24.God is not required to submit privilged knowledge of his origin.God gave all the knowledge man needed to gain eternity within the Bible.
God persues you.God does not force us to believe in him.He has provided sufficient proof of his existance for us to respond to him.
why do people oppose god if he dont exist?
With all the odds edging heavly in favor that we were created from a Creator.The ultimate reason life does exist is because a being capable of creation decided to make life abundant.The reasons for this is evident all around you and people just do not realize it.
The reason this is such a dilema is because most look at it the wrong way.If we started our own nation, we would want faithful and diligent followers.How do you know the people you accept into your nation are not traders, liars, and tresspassers?The only way you know such things is to observe them and over a period of time they would gain your trust and belief.That is exzactly what The Creator has done here.Without appearing anywhere and everywhere proving His exsitance.The Creator has used certain techniques to inspire His will upon creation and leaves it up to the creation to believe in him or not.The creation must prove that they are loyal and faithful before they can join the Kingdom.Since this is how we act here on earth it would appear that we have learned it from our Creator.

 

[godnotgod]

If we started our own nation, we would want faithful and diligent followers.How do you know the people you accept into your nation are not traders, liars, and tresspassers?The only way you know such things is to observe them and over a period of time they would gain your trust and belief.That is exzactly what The Creator has done here.Without appearing anywhere and everywhere proving His exsitance.The Creator has used certain techniques to inspire His will upon creation and leaves it up to the creation to believe in him or not. The creation must prove that they are loyal and faithful before they can join the Kingdom. Since this is how we act here on earth it would appear that we have learned it from our Creator.

In one stroke, you have created the division between the Deserving and the Undeserving, pitting them, in terms of Good and Evil, against each other, polarizing them, and thereby creating more discord in the world. Christianity has historically done this throughout the world, in the name of their God, at great cost to mankind in terms of blood and treasure. I fail to understand why anyone would want to tout such a position as one that is an enlightened one.

You contradict what Jesus told us, namely that the Kingdom of God is [already] within us, and that the gifts of the Incarnation are unconditionally given to all men, and are not only specific to Jesus Christ. In this respect, men cannot prove themselves worthy as their ticket to enter Paradise, since Paradise is already present within.

The Buddha understood this, telling us that all sentient beings are capable of reaching their highest potential simply by awakening themselves within. This too, was the teaching of the very real Yeshua, before his teachings became corrupted into what is now modern Christianity via of one St. Paul, who overwrote Yeshua's teaching of spiritual resurrection within with that of bodily resurrection into some distant heaven. Yeshua's teachings were mystical in nature, composed of three levels, with the initiates in the outer circle, and the more advanced disciples who had access to the inner mysteries deeper within. It was the outer initiates who broke off from Yeshua's teachings to become the first Christians, and who did not know these inner mysteries. Theirs was an evangelical agenda, rather than one of inner light.

But the primary difference between these doctrines is that one sees the world as intrinsically evil and attempts to change it by applying moral force, while the other sees man as intrinsically good and attempts to change the world by awakening that which is already present within, recognizing that we ourselves are the world.
*****


"First, the Sage never tries to do good, because this requires having a concept of
The Good, which leads to having a concept of Evil, which leads to combatting Evil, which only makes Evil stronger.

Second, the Sage never tries to do [moral] Good, because "every straight is doubled by a crooked, every good by an ill" [Tao Te Ching 58].

Human affairs are complex: good done to one person may be evil to another.

Reward the deserving man with a prize and we plant envy in the hearts of the undeserving."

Holmes-Welch; 'Taoism: The Parting of the Way'

 

[Heathen Hammer]

Yes, the break that refreshes and revitalizes the spirit, restoring your faith, that you have never lost.

See, you can be funny some times

 

[godnotgod]

See, you can be funny some times

I see your faith has not wavered one bit.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

One has faith in things proven to be reliable

 

[godnotgod]

One has faith in things proven to be reliable

And what happens when that which is most reliable, for some unforseen reason, suddenly becomes unreliable?

Faith is a bit different than creating a pre-condition of the known for it to be valid.

In fact, it has to do with not-knowing what is to come, and still trusting.

Try this:

'Faith in others, in the world, and in oneself is the attitude of allowing the spontaneous to be spontaneous'

Where we do not impose expectation, there is no disappointment, and no 'loss of faith'.

 

[Looncall]

How is it that you KNOW that there is no pond, frog, leaping, splashing, nor any "I"? And if there is no "I", then who is it that determines whether they exist or not?

Space is essential to Solids as the Absolute is essential to the Relative. Space is the background, or field, against which Solids are seen, as the Absolute is the background or field against which the phenomenal world is seen. If no such background exists, then your stand-alone contingent world is the Absolute, which it cannot be since it is temporal, comes and goes, and is, therefore, illusory, UNLESS it is the Absolute which is responsible for the manifestation of the phenomenal world, in which case the universe IS the Absolute itself, as seen through the screen of Time, Space, and Causation.

Summer is coming, at least where I live. It's time for green leafy things to eat, so I guess I should be grateful for this heaping helping of word salad!

 

[Heathen Hammer]

And what happens when that which is most reliable, for some unforseen reason, suddenly becomes unreliable?

Depends on the situation, dunnit?

Faith is a bit different than creating a pre-condition of the known for it to be valid.

Not sure what you mean

In fact, it has to do with not-knowing what is to come, and still trusting.
Try this:
'Faith in others, in the world, and in oneself is the attitude of allowing the spontaneous to be spontaneous'

Well, it has to do with the supposed, future situation, perhaps having been duplicated in the past, and expecting a reliable result. The result doesn't always happen, but 'faith' can sometimes encompass that eventuality, too, and merely hoping the duplication occurs this time as well.

Where we do not impose expectation, there is no disappointment, and no 'loss of faith'.

Life is full of disappointments.

 

[Prophet]

This too, was the teaching of the very real Yeshua, before his teachings became corrupted into what is now modern Christianity via of one St. Paul, who overwrote Yeshua's teaching of spiritual resurrection within with that of bodily resurrection into some distant heaven.

A problem I have with this theory is that I've found much in Paul's writings to suggest he was awakened in his letters.

I believe it makes more sense to point at money and power as the culprits to blame in the "fundamentalisation" of Christianity via the Roman Empire and its church, who are blamed directly for the corruption (albeit in code) in the book of Revelation.

 

[EnochSDP]

One has faith in things proven to be reliable

That how I feel about my God!He answers my prayers not all the time but he always provides for me and never gives to much that I may glorify myself but gives me enough to be plentiful.

 

[EnochSDP]

A problem I have with this theory is that I've found much in Paul's writings to suggest he was awakened in his letters.

I believe it makes more sense to point at money and power as the culprits to blame in the "fundamentalisation" of Christianity via the Roman Empire and its church, who are blamed directly for the corruption (albeit in code) in the book of Revelation.

I agree!Money and wealth has always been the motive.Ultimate power over all and everything is the goal here not freedom or rights!It dying right now and people want to deny.Believe I agree if people kill or use God's name for reasons other than God provided than they are not for God.My opinion is Biblical and the God of that Bible.No other!

 

[godnotgod]

A problem I have with this theory is that I've found much in Paul's writings to suggest he was awakened in his letters.

I believe it makes more sense to point at money and power as the culprits to blame in the "fundamentalisation" of Christianity via the Roman Empire and its church, who are blamed directly for the corruption (albeit in code) in the book of Revelation.

Book of Revelation? My understanding is that it was written by one John of Patmos, who was exiled to the Greek island of Patmos, where hallucinogenic mushrooms grow rampant and wild. John's visions of the apocalypse, and his descriptions of such, are consistent with visions that other users of hallucinogenic drugs, especially mushrooms, experience.

The original mystical teachings of Yeshua never included bodily resurrection, a virgin birth, nor the eating/drinking of flesh and blood. These [Mithraic] doctrines were infused into them later, and Yeshua's teachings suppressed.

Paul's primary concern was to convert the pagans to his new religion. The pagans already had the promise of eternal life in Mithraism. So he overwrote the teachings of Yeshua with those of Mithraism as a device to convert the tens of thousands of pagans.

There is much to indicate that Paul was NOT awakened, one of them being his allusion to the '500 eyewitnesses' to the Resurrection, which, upon closer examination, appears to have been concocted from whole cloth. Paul is considered by many scholars to have been a clever charlatan. He brilliantly synthesized three elements to create modern Christianity: Jewish history as a legitimate backdrop to the story; the idea of the descending Gnosis as teacher to man, taken from his exposure to Gnostic teachings; and the idea of the dying and resurrecting godhead, taken from his exposure as a child to the mystery religions, such as Mithraism and others.

In later times, the Church in Mexico converted millions of indigenous Indios to Catholicism, by 'adopting' the Aztec goddess Tonantzin and transforming her into Our Lady of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Of course the Indio dociley followed where their goddess dwelt.

People find it difficult to practice a mystical approach to 'salvation', and want instead a quick fix. In their minds, death, and a most likely hell, are imminent, and simply kneeling and submitting to a doctrine or an idol does the trick for the masses. In ancient times, death was all around, and so salvation and a way to overcome the certainty of death were paramount in people's minds. Eating/drinking the flesh/blood of the deity, along with accepting the deity as one's only Lord and savior provided these remedies.

 

[PolyHedral]

One has faith in things proven to be reliable

That how I feel about my God!He answers my prayers not all the time but he always provides for me and never gives to much that I may glorify myself but gives me enough to be plentiful.

Nothing to see here, move along...

 

[godnotgod]

Yahshua of Paul (edited)

"Paul was either unwittingly influenced by negative, disembodied demons; or he was a secret agent planted by the Roman police, working in league with the Jewish puppet-government and high priest installed by Rome. The opinion of the Essene Christians -- is that both the above are true: Paul was unknowingly influenced by disembodied demonic powers and, also, worked knowingly with corrupt worldly powers. But regardless of Paul's motive, evidences are in agreement in regard to the following: Paul craftily inflitrated the Christian movement and subverted it.

Although Paul's Christianity -- "Paulianity" -- grew to be much larger than Essene Christianity (because it was so 'worldly' and watered-down it was easier for the masses to accept; they could continue to eat meat, own slaves and control wives), Essene Christianity did continue to exist. Up until the fourth century both types of Christianity existed as separate religions: Essene Nazarene Christianity and "Catholic Paulianity". But then, in the fourth century, the Catholic Church -- by then a large state-run religion -- sent their army to exterminate (as heretics!) the Essene Nazarenes. Nearly all the Essene Nazarenes were killed and most of their books (which contain the unadulterated teachings of Jesus) were burned. From that time on, Essene Nazarene Christianity existed only in small numbers as a hidden, underground religion, while Paulianity spread all over the planet."

YAHSHUA Or Paul?
*****

This is hardly the description of a man who is spiritually 'awakened'! :no:

 

[godnotgod]

Depends on the situation, dunnit?

Not sure what you mean

Well, it has to do with the supposed, future situation, perhaps having been duplicated in the past, and expecting a reliable result. The result doesn't always happen, but 'faith' can sometimes encompass that eventuality, too, and merely hoping the duplication occurs this time as well.

Life is full of disappointments.

You're making the idea of faith much too complicated. Faith is simply a state of mind, an attitude, with no associated or specific object, expectation, or condition. Once you attach these, you are talking about belief.

Belief clings;
Faith lets go

 

[Heathen Hammer]

Book of Revelation? My understanding is that it was written by one John of Patmos, who was exiled to the Greek island of Patmos, where hallucinogenic mushrooms grow rampant and wild. John's visions of the apocalypse, and his descriptions of such, are consistent with visions that other users of hallucinogenic drugs, especially mushrooms, experience.

The original mystical teachings of Yeshua never included bodily resurrection, a virgin birth, nor the eating/drinking of flesh and blood. These [Mithraic] doctrines were infused into them later, and Yeshua's teachings suppressed.

Paul's primary concern was to convert the pagans to his new religion. The pagans already had the promise of eternal life in Mithraism. So he overwrote the teachings of Yeshua with those of Mithraism as a device to convert the tens of thousands of pagans.

There is much to indicate that Paul was NOT awakened, one of them being his allusion to the '500 eyewitnesses' to the Resurrection, which, upon closer examination, appears to have been concocted from whole cloth. Paul is considered by many scholars to have been a clever charlatan. He brilliantly synthesized three elements to create modern Christianity: Jewish history as a legitimate backdrop to the story; the idea of the descending Gnosis as teacher to man, taken from his exposure to Gnostic teachings; and the idea of the dying and resurrecting godhead, taken from his exposure as a child to the mystery religions, such as Mithraism and others.

In later times, the Church in Mexico converted millions of indigenous Indios to Catholicism, by 'adopting' the Aztec goddess Tonantzin and transforming her into Our Lady of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Of course the Indio dociley followed where their goddess dwelt.

People find it difficult to practice a mystical approach to 'salvation', and want instead a quick fix. In their minds, death, and a most likely hell, are imminent, and simply kneeling and submitting to a doctrine or an idol does the trick for the masses. In ancient times, death was all around, and so salvation and a way to overcome the certainty of death were paramount in people's minds. Eating/drinking the flesh/blood of the deity, along with accepting the deity as one's only Lord and savior provided these remedies.

See, you've wasted 50+ pages going all batty on us and then you pull out something this accurate and brilliant.

Were you having us on this whole time?

 

[Prophet]

Book of Revelation? My understanding is that it was written by one John of Patmos, who was exiled to the Greek island of Patmos, where hallucinogenic mushrooms grow rampant and wild. John's visions of the apocalypse, and his descriptions of such, are consistent with visions that other users of hallucinogenic drugs, especially mushrooms, experience.

The original mystical teachings of Yeshua never included bodily resurrection, a virgin birth, nor the eating/drinking of flesh and blood. These [Mithraic] doctrines were infused into them later, and Yeshua's teachings suppressed.

Paul's primary concern was to convert the pagans to his new religion. The pagans already had the promise of eternal life in Mithraism. So he overwrote the teachings of Yeshua with those of Mithraism as a device to convert the tens of thousands of pagans.

There is much to indicate that Paul was NOT awakened, one of them being his allusion to the '500 eyewitnesses' to the Resurrection, which, upon closer examination, appears to have been concocted from whole cloth. Paul is considered by many scholars to have been a clever charlatan. He brilliantly synthesized three elements to create modern Christianity: Jewish history as a legitimate backdrop to the story; the idea of the descending Gnosis as teacher to man, taken from his exposure to Gnostic teachings; and the idea of the dying and resurrecting godhead, taken from his exposure as a child to the mystery religions, such as Mithraism and others.

In later times, the Church in Mexico converted millions of indigenous Indios to Catholicism, by 'adopting' the Aztec goddess Tonantzin and transforming her into Our Lady of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Of course the Indio dociley followed where their goddess dwelt.

People find it difficult to practice a mystical approach to 'salvation', and want instead a quick fix. In their minds, death, and a most likely hell, are imminent, and simply kneeling and submitting to a doctrine or an idol does the trick for the masses. In ancient times, death was all around, and so salvation and a way to overcome the certainty of death were paramount in people's minds. Eating/drinking the flesh/blood of the deity, along with accepting the deity as one's only Lord and savior provided these remedies.

There's a lot of false inserted into what Jesus supposedly said, too. And that false that was inserted into what Jesus said is the same false message you conclude was preached by Paul as well.

What separates Jesus and Paul here? Why do we give Jesus a pass and condemn Paul? Is it beyond possibility that the same group who placed their corruption upon Jesus' message thought to do the same to Paul's message?

Please supply a rationale which precludes what I feel to be the most obvious interpretation: the Roman Empire persecuted Christianity harshly, and when this upstart religion still stubbornly survived, they spread misinformation about Christianity through their own gospels (today known as Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) as well as their redactions upon the epistles of various apostles not limited to Paul.

The goal of this misinformation was to insert their own religion into Christianity. The immaculate conception. The virgin birth. The physical ressurection. These were all elements of the religion of the Roman empire, which they themselves had inherited from the Babylonian empire.

This is why John called Rome the WHORE OF BABYLON. This is why John called Nero the Anti-Christ.

You claim psychedelic impairment to be responsible for the writing of Revelation. I claim that it had to be written in code unintelligible to Romans but understood by Christians to serve its purpose. I claim that if he outright called Nero the anti-Christ explicitly instead of in code, Revelation would never have survived the test of time. I claim that if John outright called Rome the murderer of the saints rather than in code, Revelation would have been burned instead of canonized.

 

[cottage]

By getting ourselves out of our own way.



But there is nothing to prevent us from doing so. We are birds in cages with open doors. Part of the problem is due to the rational mind forming concepts of perfection, which creates concepts of imperfection, keeping our conscious attention focused in the illusory dual world.We choose to stay in Plato's Cave, our minds locked in enslaved attention on the shadows cast upon its walls due to fear and indoctrination. That is why consciousness is so crucial. With it, we are able to SEE what our condition is, as Prophet tells us, and make progress toward a more enlightened, and therefore, happier state of being.

So here we are, back in the illusory world of strived-for happiness. But according to everything you been saying, striving for happiness, as with everything else in this phenomenal world, is just an illusion? So explain why do we strive for something non-existent? It seems that your arguments can never escape the constraints of the conscious mind and the prior-self. It is noted that you deny all forms of dualism, such as perfection, and then invite us to make progress towards a perfect state. But anyway, the question is how do we become happier in true reality when the concept of happiness is an illusion?

Note the personal pronoun and the relative terms.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

This is why John called Rome the WHORE OF BABYLON. This is why John called Nero the Anti-Christ.

You claim psychedelic impairment to be responsible for the writing of Revelation. I claim that it had to be written in code unintelligible to Romans but understood by Christians to serve its purpose. I claim that if he outright called Nero the anti-Christ explicitly instead of in code, Revelation would never have survived the test of time. I claim that if John outright called Rome the murderer of the saints rather than in code, Revelation would have been burned instead of canonized.

I must admit, I find it very interesting to observe this part of your statement.
In it, you plainly state, that John was speaking of Rome, in Revelation. And yet, you then laud the idea that Revelation 'stood the test of time', and is still viewed as some kind of prophetic writ today.

Since Rome. Italy was in fact, the Babylon described in John's work [since it was Rome who was John's persecutor and it was Rome who exiled him in disgrace], as the nation which would be destroyed by God, the fact that this did not happen, proves that John was not being prophetic at all. And this fact forces followers to dispose of Rome, the literal Rome, from the 'prophecy' completely and to cast about the world, each in their own Age of time, for a new metaphorical 'Babylon' to act as the subject of God's wrath. And since God's wrath upon this Babylon fails to ever manifest, each generation must place God's wrath farther and farther into some unknown future, possibly onto some farther new target, to keep Revelations going.

Even though we understand that John expected God to destroy the Babylon of his own day.

Cognitive dissonance, on a grand, multi-generational scale.

 

[Prophet]

I must admit, I find it very interesting to observe this part of your statement.
In it, you plainly state, that John was speaking of Rome, in Revelation. And yet, you then laud the idea that Revelation 'stood the test of time', and is still viewed as some kind of prophetic writ today.

Since Rome. Italy was in fact, the Babylon described in John's work [since it was Rome who was John's persecutor and it was Rome who exiled him in disgrace], as the nation which would be destroyed by God, the fact that this did not happen, proves that John was not being prophetic at all. And this fact forces followers to dispose of Rome, the literal Rome, from the 'prophecy' completely and to cast about the world, each in their own Age of time, for a new metaphorical 'Babylon' to act as the subject of God's wrath. And since God's wrath upon this Babylon fails to ever manifest, each generation must place God's wrath farther and farther into some unknown future, possibly onto some farther new target, to keep Revelations going.

Even though we understand that John expected God to destroy the Babylon of his own day.

Cognitive dissonance, on a grand, multi-generational scale.

You are attacking beliefs which aren't mine at all. I am saying Revelation was disguised as a prophecy to hide that its contents were anti-Roman in nature which is the only reason it survived. You may find it is a preferable position to understand what I say before you point out my folly.