5 Things You Won't Believe Aren't In the Bible

Post Reply New Topic

I think it's obvious the response here is the perceived shock value of the OP, and I'm not sure that was really the intent.

Sure, Cracked is entertaining. But I've read the Bible all the way through and will likely do it again soon. Taking the list in the context of the article, all the facts are in place. The only thing that is mentioned only in passing (in the Bible) is the Holy Grail ("the cup"). Everything we think we know about the Grail is myth and legend (as far as anyone knows). It is not scripturally significant in the least. It is only symbolic as a (p)re-enactment of Christ's death and the believer's chance to take part in it as well as a memorial.

As far as Christians are concerned, I don't think many of us believe in the "classical" depiction of Satan. Even the article in question made reference to the "Left Behind" series. Personally, I think the Devil and THE Antichrist ("The Beast") will be entirely more subtle than anything from a Tim Curry movie. I personally think a Christian would instantly recognize "THE" Antichrist if he appeared. For example, I don't think that Obama is the Beast of Revelation. However, I do think the instant, apparently hypnotic effect that Obama and his chief supporters in politics and in the media have had on much of the public are eerily like certain charismatic qualities of the real end-time antichrist. Obama can't be the "beast" because he isn't impervious to opposition, nor does he have the power to completely suppress his opposition. According to the Bible, the dragon and the beast will command the entire world except for the last remaining holdouts, probably pre-rapture fence-sitters.

The beast and the dragon are described explicitly as being male, so Nancy Pelosi and Sarah Palin are already out of the running.

Speaking of which, that makes me curious as to what the feminists have to say about that. Is it unfair for only men to be candidates for the ultimate final evil, or should the chief antichrist of all time be an equal-opportunity antichrist?

Lastly: Did I see correctly the Tim Curry incarnation of the Prince of Darkness on the cracked article? I STILL love "Legend." I never understood the deal with Jack and Princess Lilly. I would have been, like, let PoD have her, I want Oona! That was the only time I ever saw Annabelle Lanyon--and yes, I admit that I have a fairy fetish.

"Infocomedy"???! !!???

An estraunge conceyt

Nambo posted: Genesis 19:1
And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;

Well thats number 1 proved wrong.

[Agree - Angels are mentioned in the Bible]

Revelation 12:3 an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on its heads.
Revelation 12:9 The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan,

[Agree - There is a red dragon in the Bible]

Admittedly he isnt shown with goat legs or a pitchfork, I think thats from artists renditions, but it appears he is red and has horns!

Correct regarding number 3, its not mentioned allthough the Holy Grail is suppossed to be the cup that Jesus passed at the last supper, and the cup is mentioned. Matthew 26:27 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;

[Agree - There is a cup of some sort from which water/wine can be consumed]

2 John 1:7 I say this because many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist.

[Agree - Seems to me today that the anti-Christ is anyone who does not vote for Jesus so to speak. Christians want followers to march lockstep behind Jesus, if not, they're called anti-Jesus(ers)/anti-J. Christs]

Regarding the Anti-Christ however, the Bible tends to use the word Anti-Christ, not to refer to an individual, allthough thier is a scripture which says, "you have heard that the anti-christ is coming", but to anybody who is against Christ so uses the term anti-christs. The original poster from a Biblical point of view be termed an anti-christ.

Matthew 10:28 Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.

Hell however, has had its meaning changed somewhat, from the Biblical Hades or abode of the dead, to a Catholic bogeyman of eternal torture if you didnt become a catholic, the word means hole in the ground but just as the word Gay used to mean happy and bright, but now means homosexual, the word Hell has a differnat meaning than originally intended.

[Agree - The Italian Catholics invented their Vatican hell/gas chambers to deal with all non-conformists - everyone they couldn't burn at the stake in this life but could in their fictitious Mt. Vesuvius molten lava dungeons located under the Vatican which years ago tossed out the Bible and replaced the Bible with Italian poetry]

Gehenna, the lake of fire more fits the modern notion of a hell, but still its not a place of eternal torment, but of complete distruction, in Revelation both death and hell itself are thrown in the lake of fire, symbolising there will no longer be such conditions.

[Agree completely with how you describe Gehenna/book of Revelation]

Okay, to clear up things for those who want to critique the article, but can't be arsed to actually read all two pages of it...

It notes that the Bible never even once describes angels as looking like wimpy guys with big feathery wings and rings over their heads. That's entirely the creation of medieval artists, who wanted for some reason to incorporate images of flying babies into their paintings (according to the Kabbalah, from whence the "information" about the orders of angels comes, the Cherubim are the most powerful order, armed and armored soldiers of Heaven, not cute little Eros-analogues with harps).

The "Holy Grail" of myth is not mentioned in the Bible - the only attention that cup receives in Scripture is when Jesus drinks from it during His last Seder, and it wasn't suddenly made magical by this, any more than His chair or plate at the same meal was consecrated by mere contact with His mortal form.

The term "antichrist" is used in the Epistles to describe those who oppose the message of the Christ - there is no singular "Antichrist" destined to lead people astray. Frankly, the writers of the New Testament, by and large, weren't interested in trying to set Satan up as some sort of competition God with the same powers as the original - that, again, was a medieval invention. The Book of Revelation (not Revelations, 'cause sometimes I'm pedantic like that) doesn't even mention an Antichrist - it does mention the Beast, and the Whore of Babylon, but no mere human figure (the description of the Beast is very odd, featuring multiple heads with multiple horns each, but the writer does specify that the images he is shown are all symbolic, not literal - a distinction lost on many modern-day self-professed Christians, who often read only those passages of the Bible their clergy tell them too, ignoring surrounding bits).

Most images of the torments of Hell are drawn from the Inferno, the first section of Dante Alghieri's Divine Comedy. The New Testament never actually describes Hell, except for the bit in Revelation that specifies that after losing the great battle with Heaven, Satan and his angels will be thrown into "a lake of fire". The New Testament, in other places, implies that Hell is primarily being excluded from the Divine Presence (IIRC, Paul refers to it as "the outer darkness"); in the Old Testament (and the Torah), Sheol seems to be merely a place where the dead stay dead, rather than enjoying eternal life. (This may also explain why nobody who reports a near-death experience ever talks about seeing Hell, only Heaven - if Hell isn't that dramatic, or is just a place where dead souls are stored and never resurrected, there wouldn't be anything to report about it.)

It is interesting how many people boast of their deep Christian faith (apparently never having read chapter 6 of the Gospel According to Matthew), yet appear to be ignorant of what's actually in the Bible...

Okay... that made me laugh myself silly. The one thing I would disagree with it on is that the fiery angels with six wings are never described as covering themselves in order to stop us from bursting into flames. They are described as covering themselves, but we don't know why. On the other hand, as speculations go, it's a reasonable assumption.

DeaconBlues wrote (in part): ...Most images of the torments of Hell are drawn from the Inferno, the first section of Dante Alghieri's Divine Comedy. The New Testament never actually describes Hell, except for the bit in Revelation that specifies that after losing the great battle with Heaven, Satan and his angels will be thrown into "a lake of fire". The New Testament, in other places, implies that Hell is primarily being excluded from the Divine Presence (IIRC, Paul refers to it as "the outer darkness"); in the Old Testament (and the Torah), Sheol seems to be merely a place where the dead stay dead, rather than enjoying eternal life. (This may also explain why nobody who reports a near-death experience ever talks about seeing Hell, only Heaven - if Hell isn't that dramatic, or is just a place where dead souls are stored and never resurrected, there wouldn't be anything to report about it.)
---
My two cents on the topic is that Judaism tended to refer to hell along the lines of war is hell/being raided by the Vikings (so to speak) and finding the Vikings burned all the buildings to the ground is hell so peace as within the walls of a walled city like Jerusalem is a good thing. Regarding Christianity, I tend to think that what is hell is really the garbage pit outside of Jerusalem which was used as a way of describing where bad people/the ashes of bad people (symbolically) ended up vs lecture areas such as the Temple of Jersualem (symbol of peace, harmony, goodwill) where liberal, reformed Jews like Jesus Christ (a motivational speaker) could give motivational lectures to crowds in a somewhat free manner but not as free as the discourse available in Athens, Greece. Footnote: Please note my views are subject to change with or without notice.

if you'll forgive my biblical ignorance, could you tell me where "THE Antichrist" is described in such a way?

Like most people, you have had your interpretations shaped by Hollywood.
I think you should indeed read the Bible a few more times in order to memorise it whereupon you will see the Bible interpretes itself.

In this instance of the Beast, it is not as portrayed in "The Omen" a literal personage, if you read the book of Daniel where King Nebuchannezer has dreams of various beasts with multiply heads and horns, the interpretation Daniel gives are that they are human rulerships or governments, horns being indictive of thier individual components, for example the Hairy he goat that represented the King of Greece, (Alexander the Great), had 4 horns that proceeded from it but without power, this was to indicate the future event where Alexander died childless, so his kingdom was split between his 4 generals, but they didnt have the power of Alexander.

The Beast of Revelation also confirms itself a being a system of human government, read revelkation 17 where you will see the seven heads represent 7 kingdoms, the 10 horns represent 10 kings.

The fact all the heads and all the horns are joined onto one body indicates a United world government, quite probably this "New World Order" that eveyone is pushing for.
The fact that it looks like Satan in his 7 headed Dragon guise, indicates its a creation of Satan, made in his image, the counterfiet kingdom of God.

Like wise the Whore of Babylon can be explained.
The whore sits on 7 mountains.Rev 17:9
She has made all the nations drunk with the wine of her fornication. Rev 17:1
She is a fornicator Rev 17:1
She is a great city which rules over the Kingdoms of the earth. Rev 17:18
Dressed in Purple scarlet and gold Rev 17:4
Drunk with the blood of the saints Rev 17:6
In her skirts was found all the blood of the prophets and all the righteous killed on the earth Rev 18:24
When Babylon the Great falls, the worlds economic and trade system will collapse with it, read all Rev 18

So, who is Babylon the Great?
Well Jesus passed the Revelation to John in around 70 years AD, so it wasnt that many years earlier that Jesus had blamed the leaders of Jerusalem, the Jewish Elite for all the blood of the prophets and all the righteous slain on the earth.
The following is from Matthew 23 31Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.

32Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.

34Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:

35That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

So we see allready Jesus has identified the Whore of Babylon as the Jewish leaders or the great city of Jerusalem.
A deligant study of history might reveal the hand the Jewish bankers such as the Rothchilds have had in modern wars and revolutions, financed by thier vast wealth, as for the death of the prophets, the Jews Holy book itself bare witness that it was they themselves who murdered thier own prophets.

Do the other references back up the above supisition?
Jerusalem sits on 7 hills.
The only people to be married to God in a covernant where the Israelites, they where constantly accussed of Harlotry for fornicating with neighbouring Kingdoms instead of looking to God for protection.

Jerusalem was said to be a Queen dressed in Purple and Scarlet.

Ruling over the Kings of the world?, look up various speeches by various polititions including David Llyod George, Winston Churchill, Disraeli, look up the number of Senators with dual Israeli Nationality, let alone the bankers such as Rothchild who stated, "Give me control over the issue of a nations money, and it matters not who makes the laws".
And what better explaination for the fall of commerce in Revelation 18 than if Babylon is the Zionist banking regime?

Making the nations drunk refers to making the nations stupid, look up who controls most of the worlds media with thier rubbish dumbing down and propodanger to make people "drunk" with misunderstanding.

In Revelation 18, God tells his people, (his people being the Jews), to get out of her, (Jerusalem), for God is to destroy Babylon the Great completely.

The reason its called babylon by the way is the original Babylon controlled the known world just like the Jewish bankers do now, the Jews where kept in captivity for 70 years there where they picked up the Babylonian religion and corrupted thier own with its mystycism.
The most important Jewish Holy book is the Babylonianian Talmud.

Note that I repeatedly indicated that was my personal opinion, one that many Christians share.

As to how one may reach that conclusion, consider that Genesis describes "the serpent" as "the most cunning creature in the garden." What's interesting is that the serpent didn't "exactly" tell a lie, but rather revealed truth in such a way to suit his own purpose (tricking Adam and Eve to eat the fruit). Indeed, they died spiritually, but they didn't physically instantly drop dead. Obviously Eve might have been somewhat gullible, but even gullible people generally don't tend to do something if that action poses any obvious threat.

Revelation 13 describes the beast from the sea and the beast from the earth. The previous chapter describes the dragon. The language of 12 is such that the "woman" represents Israel, the "child" represents the Messiah, and the dragon is actually named as Satan. In fact, 12:9 describes him as "the one who deceives the whole world." Again, he'd have no followers if there were any obvious danger. And to deceive "the whole world" would indicate some way of becoming deeply entrenched in the collective consciousness. Something like, say, radical Muslims legally entering the US and eventually using the democratic process to eliminate the Constitution and impose Sharia law. After 9/11, no one would dream of such a thing in our lifetimes, but any group who wanted to bad enough could use the freedoms guaranteed them by the US Constitution to destroy those freedoms. What would be interesting would be if the idea was widespread enough and tolerated enough that any opposition to it became a minority.

Another example: Christianity has long held that homosexuality is sinful behavior. Well, the first step in persisting in homosexual behavior is challenging the validity of laws against it. If it becomes legal, you still have to clear the hurdle of making it socially acceptable. That's a battle fought through mass media, at first putting a token gay couple in every TV show and then making gay PDA as commonplace as straight PDA. Beyond that, you have to eliminate the opposition. You do that through public education and passing anti-bullying laws that especially favor openly gay bullying victims. You use that to curb the rights of the opposition, making it a crime to speak out against homosexuality. So if it becomes accepted and tolerance becomes enforceable, you have to attack the minds of the opposition. In other words, you have to make it a respectable institution. Convince clergy that it is respectable. Have "commitment ceremonies" or some such. Push for churches that accept openly gay clergy. Put pressure on conservative churches with tv ministries to avoid preaching on "controversial" issues and have their broadcasters pull the plug on them if they do. Then it becomes OK, and then the idea of ONLY straight marriages as being legit comes under attack. So if gays are allowed to marry, it's come full circle, is perfectly legit, and we're all one great big happy family. Let a generation or two pass, and people start to wonder what all the big fuss was ever about.

The trouble is you'll always have those who study the Bible and know what it says and stick to it. Everyone else might be tricked into believing that something is OK that the Bible says isn't. But, again, homosexuality wouldn't have ANY kind of foothold in our culture at large IF so many people perceived it to be any kind of danger. The problem arises when people attempt to make laws that reflect their beliefs and protect their interests only to have their will obstructed by some "check" or "balance" on a power trip. That's a violation of rights, also. But the point here is not gay-bashing, but rather the subtlety of how things Christians oppose gain so much strength in the world so quickly.

It starts innocently enough. Something you will find in US legislative acts are very tiny, subtle "riders" that show up in bills. It is possible to slip a rider into a bill that may go unnoticed for a long time, things that have nothing to do with main intent of the bill itself. But then all of a sudden an issue comes up that relates to that rider. Suddenly there is a legal precedent where there was none before, and the legal position of the legislative assembly is such that in order to avoid passing one bill, another law that HAS been passed has to be struck down. A typical rider either passes controversial issues that have no strength as their own legislation or is used by opposition to force a veto.

Very tiny, subtle, steps in the legal or legislative process, as I see it, are certainly tactics that could lead to a world situation as described by Revelation. Certain kinds of measures would never become accepted unopposed. I'm only using one example, but in my opinion the mass media is a readily accessible tool useful for effecting those kinds of changes in a free society. Even if the laws do not support what is seen through television and film, they cannot censor it. And over time the opinions of a few become the opinions of all. Thus the Devil deceives all the world.

I digress.

The dragon of Revelation 12 seems to represent a spiritual being, not a physical being or human-like leader. Verse 11 reads "They conquered him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony..." So the dragon was thrown out of heaven to inhabit the earth. Chapter 12 ends with "He...left to wage war against...those who...have the testimony about Jesus. He stood on the sand of the sea." Thus Christians and "those who keep the commandments of God" become the target of the dragon's deception.

Now, the dragon representing a spiritual force obviously has no power over those who recognize his presence in the world for what it is. You need an actual person, one of their own, to do that.

The description of Revelation 13 is of someone who rules over a number of nations. "And I saw a beast coming up out of the sea. He had 10 horns and seven heads. On his horns were 10 diadems (crowns)..." In verse 3, we find "One of his heads appeared to be fatally wounded, but his fatal wound was healed. The whole earth was amazed and followed the beast. They worshiped the dragon because he gave authority to the beast." The next verse reads that the beast was worshiped as well. Revelation 13 also goes on to describe the "beast from the earth." So the dragon has had a long history of deception but no direct authority over men. The beast from the sea represents some concentration of power to whom is given authority over men. So people are given to worship of the dragon because the dragon gives authority, and people worship the beast also. The beast from the earth represents a religious leader who instructs people to worship the dragon, the beast, and the image of the beast, not to mention he does "signs and wonders" or miracles that aren't unlike the same described elsewhere in the Bible as signs from God.

So, in short, you have a world system that allows the Devil to gain power and control by using a world government against itself. You have an international leader who manipulates that system to his own ends and appears to many as a messianic figure and ultimately concentrating all world power to and in himself. Finally you have a preacher who gathers all into a one-world religion with "THE" antichrist at its center.

In order to win over atheists/agnostics and even Christian believers themselves, the dragon and the two beasts cannot pose any obvious danger. This suggests that the socio-political environment is such that readily accepts them and their policies. Further, this environment is very hostile to true believers. Compare to the current US environment which makes those who openly speak out against homosexuality and gay marriage look like evil bullies. If Christians are some kind of inhuman or subhuman "bad guys," then any alternative in opposition to Christian values seems attractive. There won't be any problem with looking the other way when Christians are prosecuted and put to death. I don't see the world as it is as quite there yet. I heard about a teacher that got suspended for wrongly handling an incident in which the teacher violated a student's free speech rights (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-11-16-michigan-teacher-suspended-gay_N.htm). So as long as the current system still works to tolerate the views of both sides, there's nothing to worry about. It's only a problem when the door to tolerance of Christian views closes and Christians lose the right to speak up.

So while the Bible doesn't outright describe in what way(s) Satan or Satanic policies/beliefs become fully accepted or how the dragon and the beasts will appear, one only need look at the current state of affairs from a Biblical point of view to get a clue of what it will most likely be like. The dragon and the beasts of artistic fame do not appear as beings favorable and worthy of an entire world following and worship. It appears to me that the images of Hitler giving speeches are somewhat doctored in such a way to remind us of the "evil" he represents and the horrible NAZI policies his party carried out under his direction. NO ONE would dare follow someone that posed that kind of threat, but yet Hitler commanded Germany and Austria and sought to unify Europe through intensely destructive measures. One cannot gain that kind of power through means that are blatantly evil, and it was the political and social environment and attitudes that even allowed Hitler that claim to power. Obama is no Hitler, but he does have that cult-like personality and dazzling displays of political power early in his career. I think his questionable policies have caught up with him, and it seems to have happened fairly quickly in his first term. It took time, but compare that with Dubya who garnered heavy media criticism practically before the campaign even started. Dubya's surge in popularity and favorable treatment in the media directly corresponded with 9/11, and it was over within 6 months. But that also gave him the leverage to make unpopular military leaps not seen since before Vietnam. The time was right for it, just like the time was right for Obama's economic maneuverings.

In order to gain the acceptance of the entire world, there must be a similar political, social, cultural, and economic climate. I think the Bible shows that the kind of leadership of that period of time would be within an Obama-esque personality cult. You have to read the Bible and draw your own conclusions, of course. But you have to ask yourself what kind of person you think it would take to command the entire world, especially what kind of person that would appeal to you as a great world leader. You also have to ponder what the state of affairs would be such that the world would allow itself to be misled by that kind of person.

On the other hand, Tim Curry makes the big red guy look GOOD!! ! If I could be THAT built, THAT seductive, THAT ugly, and STILL have Oona...

I gotta go find that movie.

well that's no help if someone's trying to figure out wtf you're on about.

after wasting so much time reading your digression, i expected to find at least one reference to this "THE Antichrist."


@nambo what language is your bible in? how does it match up to mine? 'cause mine takes some interpreting. i'm pretty sure most bibles don't interpret themselves. i mean, it would only take one of those magic bastards to put the pope out of work.

I have lots of differant translations, though all in English, (apart from the Greek interliner). Everyone kept saying they are all different so Ihad to confirm to myself that they where lying.

What I meant by the Bible interpretating itself, I gave in my example of where one part of the Bible, Daniel, explains what the Bible means in another part, Revelation, when it talks about Beasts.
Ive probably been taken a bit too literal here, but even on other aspects, a knowledge of the whole Bible and Gods personality, help to explain individual parts which might otherwise be open to other interpretations.

As for the Pope, his work is to keep people away from God and ensure the flock are diverted from Jesus into worshiping a Sun god, Tammuz, who was born on December 25th, killed his Father and married his own Mother therefore becoming his own Father, and his mother/wife was Astarte or Easter, the fertility goddess, thats why you have eggs and bunnies to suppossedly celebrate Jesus?
The Catholics used to employ such practices as burning people alive if they ever translated the Bible from Latin, so they could see the Catholic church didnt match what was in it.
I guess nowadays people are happier watching X-Factor than reading the Bible so the pope is quite safe.

Heres a picture of a Catholic idolatrous image of Mary, the Queen of the heavens, who looks remarkably like Astarte or Semi-remis, the Queen of the Heavens who was the mother of said Sun god, in fact they havnt even tried to hide who thier god really is, as the infant Jesus looks more like the sun than the son to me.



That cat Bible is really quite remarkable, somebody has gone to a lot of trouble, and it still makes sense!
Be great to see lots of cats as well as people standing before the throne and before the lamb with palm branches in thier hands saying, our salvation we owe to the lamb.

You quote-miner, you!

Revelation Chapter 13.

revelation chapter 13 doesn't seem to mention the Antichrist. I saw some pretty awesome monsters though. You guys creep me out sometimes.

@Nambo
it's a collective project. You can submit as many verses as you want and the idea is to take the best for each. If only these damned monsters you guys are waiting for would show up and unite the world, already, we can cooperate on more important things than translating the bible into lolcat. Though, along with Klingon, it's probably one of the only languages that no one's been killed for translating the bible into.

The Holy Grail is a distorded interpretation about an item which first appeared in an unfinished arthurian-cycle novel (Perceval*, the Story of the Grail by the French author Chrétien de Troyes), in which a grail is used to sustain a crippled king. In old French, the word that is translated by "grail" in English was initially used to design a kind of dish for fish.
Chrétien de Troyes died before achieving his Perceval, the tale has been continued by other writers (which was rather common in the time) who connected this grail to the holy cup in which the Christ drank and which was later used to gather his blood...

* The character is better known as "Percival" in English.

The beast from the sea? To whom all authority over the earth is given by the dragon? The dragon is identified in chapter 12 as Satan. THE Antichrist of the end-times is represented by the beast from the sea in chapter 13, and chapter 13 tells us that the beast takes on the role of a single world leader. Chapter 13 goes on to tell about the beast from the earth, often referred to as "the false prophet" who works miracles and makes an image of the beast from the sea that does some fun stuff and which is to also be an object of worship. It's not necessary to name the beast from the sea as "antichrist," that is, using those exact words. "Antichrist" IS defined elsewhere in the Bible as any person who opposes Christ but special emphasis is given to those "false-christs" as being antichrist. Those are not people that necessarily deny Christ, but rather paint themselves as having the role of messiah and deceive people into believing an incorrect message. Because of the godlike position of authority the beast from the sea will have and because of his opposition to God and Christ, he is from the earlier definition an antichrist.

There is one passage for sure where an angel had wings (several pairs) and glowed. Of course, it was also covered with eyes, and had multiple faces. (Ezekiel)