Lena Einhorn wrote:
Earlier in this thread (page 2) I wrote about the two demoniacs in Gerasa/Gadara, who had both dwelled in the tombs. And I made a comparison to the two rebel leaders during the final struggle in Jerusalem -- Simon bar Giora and John of Gischala -- who, when all is destroyed (mostly by them) go hiding in the caverns of Jerusalem, but are finally brought up and punished.
And doesn't this description in Revelation 11 fit them quite well?
6. These have the power to shut up the sky, so that rain will not fall during the days of their prophesying; and they have power over the waters to turn them into blood, and to strike the earth with every plague, as often as they desire.
7. When they have finished their testimony, the beast that comes up out of the abyss will make war with them, and overcome them and kill them.
8. And their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which mystically is called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified.
9. Those from the peoples and tribes and tongues and nations will look at their dead bodies for three and a half days, and will not permit their dead bodies to be laid in a tomb.
10. And those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them and celebrate; and they will send gifts to one another, because these two prophets tormented those who dwell on the earth.
Quite some beautiful cities together, especially Stockholm.Lena Einhorn wrote:To MrMacSon and Michael BG:
I have said this a few times in this thread, but I'll say it again: when alternative explanations are suggested for each separate element in a multi-component parallel between the NT and other sources (mine or anybody elses) this is of course perfectly all right. But there are ALWAYS alternative explanations to each element. The question is if these are brought forth to elucidate or obscure, and if they produce a scenario more or less complete and consistent than the scenario they are brought forth to debunk.
If I am describing a city where there is a Statue of Liberty, where the central part is an island, where there is a big urban park, where the location is the western hemisphere amd the main language is English, it is perfectly valid to suggest that:
1. The Statue of Liberty is by the Musée d'Orsay in Paris
2. The central island is found in Stockholm
3. The big park is Fairmount Park in Philadelphia
4. The western hemisphere location is Rio de Janeiro
5. And the city where the main language is English is Canberra
But if we look at all the elements at the same time, it makes much more sense to think of New York.
I'm not trying to be facetious here, I'm just trying to make my point. I think the question we all have to ask ourselves when we look at different scenarios presented -- especially when the topic is close to our heart -- is whether we are curious enough to be fully open to the new idea. Or if debunking is our knee-jerk reaction.
And yes, I of course have to ask myself the same question.
May I conclude from your 'cities' contribution that we’d better look at NT stories as unities? I will try to continue your mental exercise here. Above I discussed Revelation chapter 11 as a unity, and in your reply (quote above) you picked out verse 6 to 10, suggesting that they might refer to John of Gischala and Simon bar Giora. Continuing to the next verses, the resurrection verse 11 and the ascension verse 12, can you tell where in the NT or in any other ancient source there is information available on the resurrection and ascension of both John of Gischala and Simon bar Giora?
I think Simon bar Giora is present elsewhere in the NT, in the Gospel of Luke in particular. I hope to discuss that story soon (in a new topic).