| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
A_Atheist_named_Christian
Forum Master
Joined: 31 Mar 2006
Posts: 2934
Local time: 11:54 PM
Location: The Caribbean
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 10:20 am Post subject: |
  |
|
| romans120 wrote: | | It could have be a catastrophic meteor shower |
Which so far has been scientifically proven to be a natural event.
Even if a catastrophic meteor shower were to occur in the future, why should I believe that it will have any supernatural significance? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|
josephpalazzo
Illusion Master
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 8036
Local time: 10:54 PM
Location: D-brane
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 12:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| A_Atheist_named_Christian wrote: | | romans120 wrote: | | It could have be a catastrophic meteor shower |
Which so far has been scientifically proven to be a natural event.
Even if a catastrophic meteor shower were to occur in the future, why should I believe that it will have any supernatural significance? |
Anyone can figure it out that such a meteor shower would be God's punishment, duh...  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chris Johnston
Intern
Joined: 27 Dec 2007
Posts: 51
Local time: 10:54 PM
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| romans120 wrote: | | Chris Johnston wrote: | The thing that really gets me is that no one who teaches "The Revelation of St. John the Divine," (the real name of the book) seems to understand what type of literature it is.
Tell me Romans 1:20, what is this book? Because it's not prophecy. You interpret it in ways that are obvious to you but would have been nonsense to your brethren 100 years ago, or 1000 years ago even more so. All of the preceding would have thought you a heretic, because the interpretation of this book is so wildly divergent as to make it completely useless and incomprehensible. Of course it makes for good songs, such as Johnny Cash's "When the man comes around."
This book is not prophecy. What is it? Can anyone tell me the type of literature that "The Revelation of St. John the Divine" is?
Roman boy? Beuller? |
It is a warning of things to come (AKA prophesy). Now the purpose of the book is not primarily prophesy though it is a large part. It is primarily a record of how the Messiah will fulfill all the promises made to Israel. What kind of literature do you think it is and why?
I'm not sure my way of interpreting would have been nonesense 100 - 1000 years ago. All I do is try interpret as literally and as closely to what the readers of the day would have understood. Throughout the years that has never been the most popular approach but It certainly was never non-existent. You have to remember during early church history they fought over different things. They all agreed that the return of Christ was immanent so they chose to fight over christology and pneumatology and the trinity and tabled eschatology |
WRONG. This book is not prophecy. Neither is prophecy a foretelling of the future. If you are going to preach the Bible, perhaps you should understand more than your Scofield Bible Hermeneutics.
Prophecy is not foretelling the future, it is "forthtelling," or another word for PREACHING. Very little of what is written in the Bible would have been understood by those who heard it first as a foretelling of future history, other than the grand themes of ultimate redemption. The "prophecies" you are so in love with are only that in hindsight, with the benefit of a loose sense of historical accuracy that allows you to twist them to whatever end you wish. NONE of what you have "interpreted" would have made any sense to any Xian in recorded history until about the mid-1800s and forward.
This book is not prophecy but "apocalyptic" literature. It has nothing to do with future history except in the broadest sense of the word.
_________________
Faith in Action Blog
Sashi-no-eda bonsai blog |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
romans120
Resident Theist
Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 2051
Local time: 9:54 PM
Location: The God Shaped Hole in Your Heart
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chris Johnston wrote: | | romans120 wrote: | | Chris Johnston wrote: | The thing that really gets me is that no one who teaches "The Revelation of St. John the Divine," (the real name of the book) seems to understand what type of literature it is.
Tell me Romans 1:20, what is this book? Because it's not prophecy. You interpret it in ways that are obvious to you but would have been nonsense to your brethren 100 years ago, or 1000 years ago even more so. All of the preceding would have thought you a heretic, because the interpretation of this book is so wildly divergent as to make it completely useless and incomprehensible. Of course it makes for good songs, such as Johnny Cash's "When the man comes around."
This book is not prophecy. What is it? Can anyone tell me the type of literature that "The Revelation of St. John the Divine" is?
Roman boy? Beuller? |
It is a warning of things to come (AKA prophesy). Now the purpose of the book is not primarily prophesy though it is a large part. It is primarily a record of how the Messiah will fulfill all the promises made to Israel. What kind of literature do you think it is and why?
I'm not sure my way of interpreting would have been nonesense 100 - 1000 years ago. All I do is try interpret as literally and as closely to what the readers of the day would have understood. Throughout the years that has never been the most popular approach but It certainly was never non-existent. You have to remember during early church history they fought over different things. They all agreed that the return of Christ was immanent so they chose to fight over christology and pneumatology and the trinity and tabled eschatology |
WRONG. This book is not prophecy. Neither is prophecy a foretelling of the future. If you are going to preach the Bible, perhaps you should understand more than your Scofield Bible Hermeneutics.
Prophecy is not foretelling the future, it is "forthtelling," or another word for PREACHING. Very little of what is written in the Bible would have been understood by those who heard it first as a foretelling of future history, other than the grand themes of ultimate redemption. The "prophecies" you are so in love with are only that in hindsight, with the benefit of a loose sense of historical accuracy that allows you to twist them to whatever end you wish. NONE of what you have "interpreted" would have made any sense to any Xian in recorded history until about the mid-1800s and forward.
This book is not prophecy but "apocalyptic" literature. It has nothing to do with future history except in the broadest sense of the word. |
So what is your point? You are correct that prophesy is not only/necessarily dealing with future events but neither is it restricted to only forthtelling here is the semantic range of the greek word for prophesy as it is used in revelation of st. john the divine according to "BAGD" greek lexicon
| Quote: |
1. to proclaim an inspired revelation, prophesy abs. (Diod. S. 17, 51, 1; Jos., Ant. 5, 348)
2. to tell about someth. that is hidden from view, tell, reveal, of the scornful challenge to Jesus that reduces inspired activity to clairvoyance profh,teuson h`mi/n,
3. to foretell someth. that lies in the future, foretell, prophesy |
So I don't follow how the hermeneutics change by specifically defining exactly what kind of prophesy John is engaging in
What makes "Apocalyptic literature" is the content of the prophesy. In other words just plain jane future is plain jane prophesy and revelation of "last things" is way cooler so it gets a cooler title of apocalyptic literature
_________________
For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. Romans 1:19-20
Check out my weblog at http://romans120.wordpress.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr_C
Reckoner
Joined: 26 Jun 2006
Posts: 6608
Local time: 8:54 PM
Location: Pale Blue Dot
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chris Johnston wrote: |
WRONG. This book is not prophecy. Neither is prophecy a foretelling of the future. If you are going to preach the Bible, perhaps you should understand more than your Scofield Bible Hermeneutics.
Prophecy is not foretelling the future, it is "forthtelling," or another word for PREACHING. Very little of what is written in the Bible would have been understood by those who heard it first as a foretelling of future history, other than the grand themes of ultimate redemption. The "prophecies" you are so in love with are only that in hindsight, with the benefit of a loose sense of historical accuracy that allows you to twist them to whatever end you wish. NONE of what you have "interpreted" would have made any sense to any Xian in recorded history until about the mid-1800s and forward.
This book is not prophecy but "apocalyptic" literature. It has nothing to do with future history except in the broadest sense of the word. |
The link that you gave directly contradicts what you wrote above. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
romans120
Resident Theist
Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 2051
Local time: 9:54 PM
Location: The God Shaped Hole in Your Heart
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mr_C wrote: | | Chris Johnston wrote: |
WRONG. This book is not prophecy. Neither is prophecy a foretelling of the future. If you are going to preach the Bible, perhaps you should understand more than your Scofield Bible Hermeneutics.
Prophecy is not foretelling the future, it is "forthtelling," or another word for PREACHING. Very little of what is written in the Bible would have been understood by those who heard it first as a foretelling of future history, other than the grand themes of ultimate redemption. The "prophecies" you are so in love with are only that in hindsight, with the benefit of a loose sense of historical accuracy that allows you to twist them to whatever end you wish. NONE of what you have "interpreted" would have made any sense to any Xian in recorded history until about the mid-1800s and forward.
This book is not prophecy but "apocalyptic" literature. It has nothing to do with future history except in the broadest sense of the word. |
The link that you gave directly contradicts what you wrote above. |
 I know it had me confused. I'm a little edgy sometimes when people post a link that doesn't prove their point that I might not have read what I should. But now that you said something I can breath a little easier since the epicurean nightmare is in agreement.
_________________
For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. Romans 1:19-20
Check out my weblog at http://romans120.wordpress.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr_C
Reckoner
Joined: 26 Jun 2006
Posts: 6608
Local time: 8:54 PM
Location: Pale Blue Dot
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LOL! Glad to oblige...
_________________
"If we long to believe that the stars rise and set for us, that we are the reason there is a Universe, does science do us a disservice in deflating our conceits?"
Carl Sagan
The Atheist Forums Rules
Summary: Just play nice, mmkay? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jason_Harvestdancer
WonderMod Powers ACTIVATE!
Joined: 23 Oct 2005
Posts: 2428
Local time: 7:54 PM
Location: Northern LA County, CA
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aitm wrote: | I remind you sir that revelations also tells us the beast shall rise from the earth and with its tail fling one third of the stars to the earth.
Now, as you know, since the nearest stars is what.. 2 million light years away, (not counting the sun) and this thing is supposed to get 1/3 of all the stars of heaven. Yeah, thats going to happen. |
Proxima Centauri is about 5 light years away. Bernard's star is about 8 if I recall correctly.
_________________
Nos laetus edo qui votum opprimo nobis.
LakeGeorgeMan actually think's I'm Socrates.
Visit my wife's art gallery |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Unbeliever
Forum Master
Joined: 11 Apr 2005
Posts: 2557
Local time: 8:54 PM
Location: The exact center of my observable universe
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Felix wrote: | | Hit_me_up024 wrote: | | couldnt god do better than a white horse? |
seriously he should be on a white Liger that pisses fire with teeth of gold like flavor flav. |
I don't know, I think if I were a conquering god/saviour, I'd want to ride an Invisible Pink Unicorn! 
_________________
"True wisdom is less presuming than folly. The wise man doubteth often, and changeth his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubteth not; he knoweth all things but his own ignorance."
Akhenaton?( c. B.P. 1575)
Science is a lighthouse,
Faith is the rocks below.
God Not Found - resources for atheist/agnostics
"the universe is under no obligation to be easy for us to comprehend."
moloth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aitm
using the thinker thingy
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Posts: 1265
Local time: 10:54 PM
Location: Melbourne, Fl
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 7:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| romans120 wrote: | | aitm wrote: | I remind you sir that revelations also tells us the beast shall rise from the earth and with its tail fling one third of the stars to the earth.
Now, as you know, since the nearest stars is what.. 2 million light years away, (not counting the sun) and this thing is supposed to get 1/3 of all the stars of heaven. Yeah, thats going to happen.
Our early ancestors thought stars were twinkly little things just above the clouds. The sun was within reach of a mighty bow hunter and the moon could be captured with a hard tossed net. Fer cryin out loud does anyone ever read this silly stuff. |
| Quote: | | Revelation 6:12 When he opened the sixth seal, I looked, and behold, there was a great earthquake, and the sun became black as sackcloth, the full moon became like blood, 13 and the stars of the sky fell to the earth as the fig tree sheds its winter fruit when shaken by a gale. 14 The sky vanished like a scroll that is being rolled up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place. 15 Then the kings of the earth and the great ones and the generals and the rich and the powerful, and everyone, slave and free, hid themselves in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains, |
This would be a classic example of phenomenal language. It could have be a catastrophic meteor shower and the author used stars to communicate the concept of falling objects from the sky.
edit: excuse me you were refering to this passage
| Quote: | | Revelation 12:1 And a great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. 2 She was pregnant and was crying out in birth pains and the agony of giving birth. 3 And another sign appeared in heaven: behold, a great red dragon, with seven heads and ten horns, and on his heads seven diadems. 4 His tail swept down a third of the stars of heaven and cast them to the earth. And the dragon stood before the woman who was about to give birth, so that when she bore her child he might devour it. 5 She gave birth to a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, (messianic reference - already happened) but her child was caught up to God and to his throne, |
Note the coralation that the women is also crowned with stars. But even beyond that this text is clearly symbolic of the incarnation and transfiguration of Christ as being introductory to the dispensation of the church. |
Revelations 12:4 is not the first time that the babble refers to the ease of gathering the stars. Isiah does it in the OT and Matthew as well if I remember correctly. This is really a simple story of simple people who think the stars are just beyond the clouds. This is why in Genesis the water above the firmament and below is confusing to some, but if you realize that uneducated people would naturally believe the sky is water as it is blue and water falls from it....HELLO! Everytime the clouds are mentioned it is with god or angels so the cloud are in fact the heavens. The jewish word for firmament meant "expance" I actually have the word but I am not going to look it up just for the f of it. In Isaiah it is said that god rolls up the stars like a scroll. or some such stuff. If you were to read Genesis as if you had no idea of basic science, it becomes painfully obvious how painfully ignorant they were at that time. But that is not their fault, they were just learning, the real painfully ignorant part is that today we still have millions who cannot see beyond the emperors coat.
_________________
Its not that I question so much whether a god created man, but that he would admit it.- Thomas Brumfield
psst, theres a vagina on your bumper!
Knowledge: The cure for religion.
The reality is: The majority of Christians are, because they have never read the Bible, whereas the majority of Atheists are, because they have. tjb |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aitm
using the thinker thingy
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Posts: 1265
Local time: 10:54 PM
Location: Melbourne, Fl
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jason_Harvestdancer wrote: | | aitm wrote: | I remind you sir that revelations also tells us the beast shall rise from the earth and with its tail fling one third of the stars to the earth.
Now, as you know, since the nearest stars is what.. 2 million light years away, (not counting the sun) and this thing is supposed to get 1/3 of all the stars of heaven. Yeah, thats going to happen. |
Proxima Centauri is about 5 light years away. Bernard's star is about 8 if I recall correctly. |
Thank you for the correction Jason, I am sure you are right. So the beasts tail has to be at least 30 trillion miles across for ..er...one star. Thank you sir.
_________________
Its not that I question so much whether a god created man, but that he would admit it.- Thomas Brumfield
psst, theres a vagina on your bumper!
Knowledge: The cure for religion.
The reality is: The majority of Christians are, because they have never read the Bible, whereas the majority of Atheists are, because they have. tjb |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Live Video and Chat Room
Freethought Videos
FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Register
