8 ms·

The 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

The 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.
  - stogot 1y ago
    Its systematic theology is internally consistent; amazingly consistent given three thousand years across 66 books and dozens of authors. It’s the cherry picking and overemphas that gets one into trouble
    - cindyllm 1y ago
      [dead]
    - fluoridation 1y ago
      >Its systematic theology is internally consistent It's not. Christian dogma doesn't even obey the law of identity.
      - stogot 1y ago
        are you talking about the trinity?
        fluoridation 1y ago
        I'm talking about the divinity of Jesus.
        stogot 1y ago
        This is a widely researched topic by scholars. Is there something new or relevant you’re making a case for? Or is this purposefully obtuse
        fluoridation 1y ago
        LOL, "researched". >Is there something new or relevant you’re making a case for? New? Not, not really. It's not at all new that the official position of the church ("Jesus is entirely mortal and entirely divine") is inherently self-contradictory. I mean, what the hell. If I didn't know any better I'd think an atheist came up with it to troll early Christians. Try saying something similar about literally anything else. "The contents of this glass are simultaneously entirely water and entirely mercury." It says nothing good of either the followers or the clergy that that nonsense has been accepted for so long.
        svieira 1y ago
eru 1y ago
That's why the Catholics have a guy in charge who infallibly tells you how to interpret the damn thing. Instead of having every Tom, Dick and Harry have a stab at misunderstanding scripture.
- akerl_ 1y ago
  It's a good thing there's always exactly one pope.
  - gnabgib 1y ago
    Well that's provably false.. there've been three popes[0] and zero popes happen now and then (2025[1], 2013[2], 2005, 1978..) [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Schism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Schism [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Leo_XIV https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Leo_XIV [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Francis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Francis
    - 48terry 1y ago
      That was the joke.
      - akerl_ 1y ago
        Thanks <3
  - o11c 1y ago
    Okay, where's the "falsehoods programmers believe about ..." article for popes?
- fluoridation 1y ago
  Not that that stops individual Catholics from having their own opinions anyway. It's fractal cherry picking.
- Starman_Jones 1y ago
  [dead]
krapp 1y ago
I wish Christians would realize the Book of Revelations is about the past (probably about Nero Caesar and Roman persecution of Christians) and not the future and stop embarrassing themselves. Stop trying to figure out which scary new technology is the Number of the Beast. Stop trying to figure out which scary new politician is the Antichrist. Stop trying to figure out what any of that shit means, it doesn't mean anything anymore and the only apocalypse that's going to happen is the one we ourselves create, in part because we persist in our delusion that we don't really have to worry about this world because God's going to burn it all down anyway.

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.
- stogot 1y ago
  Its systematic theology is internally consistent; amazingly consistent given three thousand years across 66 books and dozens of authors. It’s the cherry picking and overemphas that gets one into trouble
  - cindyllm 1y ago
    [dead]
  - fluoridation 1y ago
    >Its systematic theology is internally consistent It's not. Christian dogma doesn't even obey the law of identity.
    - stogot 1y ago
      are you talking about the trinity?
      - fluoridation 1y ago
        I'm talking about the divinity of Jesus.
        stogot 1y ago
        This is a widely researched topic by scholars. Is there something new or relevant you’re making a case for? Or is this purposefully obtuse
        fluoridation 1y ago
        LOL, "researched". >Is there something new or relevant you’re making a case for? New? Not, not really. It's not at all new that the official position of the church ("Jesus is entirely mortal and entirely divine") is inherently self-contradictory. I mean, what the hell. If I didn't know any better I'd think an atheist came up with it to troll early Christians. Try saying something similar about literally anything else. "The contents of this glass are simultaneously entirely water and entirely mercury." It says nothing good of either the followers or the clergy that that nonsense has been accepted for so long.
        svieira 1y ago

eru 1y ago

That's why the Catholics have a guy in charge who infallibly tells you how to interpret the damn thing. Instead of having every Tom, Dick and Harry have a stab at misunderstanding scripture.

akerl_ 1y ago
It's a good thing there's always exactly one pope.
- gnabgib 1y ago
  Well that's provably false.. there've been three popes[0] and zero popes happen now and then (2025[1], 2013[2], 2005, 1978..) [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Schism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Schism [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Leo_XIV https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Leo_XIV [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Francis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Francis
  - 48terry 1y ago
    That was the joke.
    - akerl_ 1y ago
      Thanks <3
- o11c 1y ago
  Okay, where's the "falsehoods programmers believe about ..." article for popes?
fluoridation 1y ago
Not that that stops individual Catholics from having their own opinions anyway. It's fractal cherry picking.
Starman_Jones 1y ago
[dead]

krapp 1y ago

I wish Christians would realize the Book of Revelations is about the past (probably about Nero Caesar and Roman persecution of Christians) and not the future and stop embarrassing themselves. Stop trying to figure out which scary new technology is the Number of the Beast. Stop trying to figure out which scary new politician is the Antichrist. Stop trying to figure out what any of that shit means, it doesn't mean anything anymore and the only apocalypse that's going to happen is the one we ourselves create, in part because we persist in our delusion that we don't really have to worry about this world because God's going to burn it all down anyway.