7 ms·
One mildly interesting fact that MANY Christians get wrong: There is no lead-up to the apocalypse. The Messiah will return "like a thief in the night" and "nob
by kulahan 1y ago
One mildly interesting fact that MANY Christians get wrong:
There is no lead-up to the apocalypse. The Messiah will return "like a thief in the night" and "nobody, except my Father, knows the hour of my return" (I probably butchered those two quotes). Either way, the Bible is pretty clear (as was Jesus): there will be zero indication the apocalypse is coming. None. It'll just... start.
- iamthejuan 1y agoSigns were given, not dates.
- bloppe 1y agoThe homeless man currently yelling outside my window is an equally authoritative source of information about the apocalypse as the Bible, and he thinks it's coming soon.
- kulahan 1y agoA billion people don't believe there's some truth to what the homeless man outside of your window is saying, and someone leading a legitimate-enough revolution that they're put to death by the King of Rome is probably a tiny bit more believable. But I get what you're saying either way. I just think it's an interesting factlet.
- sbuttgereit 1y agoargumentum ad populum and argument from authority in one sentence... :-)
- eru 1y agoWho's the King of Rome? The Romans famously got rid of their kings long before anyone ever thought of Christianity, and later it took until the fall of the Empire before anyone was both a king and in charge of Rome.
- potatoman22 1y agoAfter the Roman Republic, they switched to having an emperor. Jesus was crucified during this Roman empire. The kings of Rome were around 600 years before this. They meant the emperor, not the king.
- bloppe 1y agoHow many millions of people think the world is literally 6000 years old because of that book? Does that make it believable to you?
- fluoridation 1y agoThe book of Revelation also cites various signs that are metaphorical enough to be applied to just about anything. It's pointless to cite the Bible to defend a theological position, because someone else can cite a different part that can be interpreted to say the exact opposite.
- fred_wilson 1y ago> The book of Revelation also cites various signs that are metaphorical enough to be applied to just about anything. If someone plans to, they should first read Revelation 22:18–19. And Revelations isn’t the only prophetic work. Try Ezekiel. > It's pointless to cite the Bible to defend a theological position Understandable, but citing the Bible is fairly important in theology, though it should be done within context. Sure, Judaism was word of mouth a long time, and that’s great. I personally can’t remember much, so I think referencing text is fine.
- fluoridation 1y ago>If someone plans to, they should first read Revelation 22:18–19. See, that's when you use literal reading. "I'm not adding anything to the text, I'm just interpreting it." >And Revelations isn’t the only prophetic work. Try Ezekiel. Ezekiel is clearly about events in our past, though. >Understandable, but citing the Bible is fairly important in theology, though it should be done within context. Meh. There's no internally consistent Christian theology that cites the Bible and doesn't involve generous amounts of cherry picking.
- flogflogflog 1y ago[dead]
- jancsika 1y agoOne mildly interesting fact MANY programmers get wrong about the is_computer_on function: It is threadsafe. The documentation is very clear about this.
- stogot 1y agoCould you clarify this analogy? I’m confused
- conorcleary 1y agoMaybe something about programs being able to skip the 'is there a power cord connected to this PSU?' type jesting?
- LorenPechtel 1y agoYou could legitimately have a is_computer_on function. Some devices have wake-on-lan type functionality. What about the code involved?
- asdfasvea 1y agoThe term "religious fact" always puts a smile on my face.