Sadly, I agree that greed and corruption are part of the human condition. And those that possess this trait in greater abundance tend to drift into positions of power and influence. It takes strong, ethical leaders, those who can absorb the slings and arrows against them, to rise up and rally the masses to counter this phenomena. I don't think we'll ever move past this dynamic.
Sadly, I agree that greed and corruption are part of the human condition. And those that possess this trait in greater abundance tend to drift into positions of power and influence. It takes strong, ethical leaders, those who can absorb the slings and arrows against them, to rise up and rally the masses to counter this phenomena. I don't think we'll ever move past this dynamic.
I don't think we will either. Which means we are doomed to repeat the same lessons over and over and over again until we finally do destroy ourselves. The dinosaurs had millions of years on this rock. I doubt our civilization will even get a hundred thousand years.
Just read the Bible, a fabulous tome on the lack of progression of the human condition. How many times must God destroy humans before they wise up? Is the Revelation the final straw? It is disconcerting that JohnтАЩs vision shows that the vast majority of humanity will be wiped out trying to rid Earth of crappy people.
I've read the Bible, a few times. I think John was smoking Patmosian peyote when he wrote that thing. It can be interpreted so many ways that it is impossible to know exactly what he was talking about or seeing. We do know that Christ's return will usher in 1000 years of peace. Why? Because the crappy people will all be gone. But when does this happen? Who knows.
Hello, Cankerpuss. I generally stay out of threads about religion, but there are a couple things that push buttons. Revelation is one. I left a similar comment on JHK's last post so excuse the repetition.
If one studies the Bible as a piece of literature, one will learn that Revelation is written to a format that was popular in those times. There are other Revelations--this one got into the Bible. These pieces were written using weird symbolism and very circumspect language due to what they were communicating. They were written for the people of their times and those folks tended to know what they meant. They were not written as prophesies for people in any future time, and they were not meant for us centuries later.
Also, the Biblical John did not write it. The author is unknown. It was common for authors to attribute their works to a Biblical character (thus the Revelation of John, the Gospels Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, for example). This was to lend gravitas and credibility, whereas the Revelation of Phil (for example) wouldn't carry much weight.
I got this information from listening to the incredibly interesting and informative podcasts of Robert M. Price, whose scholasticism is without peer. If I mischaracterize his work, that's on me.
Just a thought, Donna, How did these very ignorant fishermen get to be so knowledgeable about things biblical? How was Pentecost, witnessed by Lucanus, possible when the same folks were able to communicate to a multi-lingual crowd and were understood by everyone? There were two spiritual avenues that survived the craziness of Jerusalem at the time of Jesus, Christianity and Judaism. Jerusalem was literally destroyed to the ground, fulfilling Jesus words in 70 AD. He announced to the worlds with those prophetic words that the road to God was not in a temple any more that it is within all of us.
Myself, I do not believe in the full import of Revelation. I cannot reconcile the kindness of a benevolent God, revealed in the form of Jesus, and the violent cruelty of the revelation Jesus.
Maybe the Revelation was the peyote inspired revenge seeking output of the last surviving disciple against the Roman Empire, the Babylonian Whore.
Well, the ignorant fisherman didn't write any of the Bible, for one thing. The Gospels are very sophisticated pieces of writing, in formats that were taught to educated people. The authors put the names of supposed apostles on the Gospels to lend them gravitas, as I explained above. I don't know anything about Lucanus so must pass on opining.
St. Luke, who wrote Luke and The Acts of the Apostles. He was a Greek MD who was a Jesus biographer through interviews with People who knew Jesus. Most notable was Mary, the mother of Jesus, that is why the Xmas story is in Luke.
John was a fisherman and the longest living of the twelve.
Mark was a companion of Paul, full name John Mark.
Matthew was a tax collector, so very methodical. He was an on site biographer.
Yes, those are the bios given in the book. But there is no proof that any of those people existed. You can't use the book to prove the existence of anything in the book. That's like me saying that Batman is real. There are truckloads of stories about Batman! We know his origin story and his secret identity. We know he fights crime in Gotham City, and we know he exists because Commissioner Gordon, Robin and Alfred have all seen him and interacted with him. It's all in the stories!
It's exactly the same thing. Different proof must be presented to prove the people in the Bible existed and the events happened. To prove someone existed in the ancient world, historians discuss standards of proof. Let's take Julius Caesar. We are sure enough that he existed because we have a great deal of historical evidence. To wit: 1) we have his own prolific writings, 2) contemporary figures such as Cicero, who actually lived during Caesar's time, attested to his deeds and wrote about them, 3) biographies were written after his death (such as by Plutarch), and 4) there is a lot of archaeological evidence such as his image on coinage, statuary, and the Temple of Julius
Caesar.
There is nothing outside of the book to prove the existence of the characters or events in the book.
Right. I wonder how much of the Bible was drug induced.
Two comments, first, the OT God who wipes out civilizations, I wonder how much of that was trying to explain the ability of Hebrews to destroy Kingdoms of the old world by their own story tellers. The Hebrews were powerful and organized behind a common heritage, unlike most of the тАЬtribesтАЭ of the day.
Second, even after New Jerusalem comes down and God moves in, resources to control errant human behavior are in place. So even with he return of Eden, there will be bad people that will be dealt with.
Sadly, I agree that greed and corruption are part of the human condition. And those that possess this trait in greater abundance tend to drift into positions of power and influence. It takes strong, ethical leaders, those who can absorb the slings and arrows against them, to rise up and rally the masses to counter this phenomena. I don't think we'll ever move past this dynamic.
I don't think we will either. Which means we are doomed to repeat the same lessons over and over and over again until we finally do destroy ourselves. The dinosaurs had millions of years on this rock. I doubt our civilization will even get a hundred thousand years.
Just read the Bible, a fabulous tome on the lack of progression of the human condition. How many times must God destroy humans before they wise up? Is the Revelation the final straw? It is disconcerting that JohnтАЩs vision shows that the vast majority of humanity will be wiped out trying to rid Earth of crappy people.
Can the New Testament Possibly Be True?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuyVVJOwzJo
The Gospel of John is Fabricated: Fake History Exposed! | Dr. Hugo Mendez
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvqn5McIwXY&t=56s
I've read the Bible, a few times. I think John was smoking Patmosian peyote when he wrote that thing. It can be interpreted so many ways that it is impossible to know exactly what he was talking about or seeing. We do know that Christ's return will usher in 1000 years of peace. Why? Because the crappy people will all be gone. But when does this happen? Who knows.
Hello, Cankerpuss. I generally stay out of threads about religion, but there are a couple things that push buttons. Revelation is one. I left a similar comment on JHK's last post so excuse the repetition.
If one studies the Bible as a piece of literature, one will learn that Revelation is written to a format that was popular in those times. There are other Revelations--this one got into the Bible. These pieces were written using weird symbolism and very circumspect language due to what they were communicating. They were written for the people of their times and those folks tended to know what they meant. They were not written as prophesies for people in any future time, and they were not meant for us centuries later.
Also, the Biblical John did not write it. The author is unknown. It was common for authors to attribute their works to a Biblical character (thus the Revelation of John, the Gospels Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, for example). This was to lend gravitas and credibility, whereas the Revelation of Phil (for example) wouldn't carry much weight.
I got this information from listening to the incredibly interesting and informative podcasts of Robert M. Price, whose scholasticism is without peer. If I mischaracterize his work, that's on me.
That is a most interesting take on the Book of Revelation. Thank you for sharing your thoughts with me.
Oh, hey, you're welcome! Thanks for being open-minded, Cankerpuss.
Just a thought, Donna, How did these very ignorant fishermen get to be so knowledgeable about things biblical? How was Pentecost, witnessed by Lucanus, possible when the same folks were able to communicate to a multi-lingual crowd and were understood by everyone? There were two spiritual avenues that survived the craziness of Jerusalem at the time of Jesus, Christianity and Judaism. Jerusalem was literally destroyed to the ground, fulfilling Jesus words in 70 AD. He announced to the worlds with those prophetic words that the road to God was not in a temple any more that it is within all of us.
Myself, I do not believe in the full import of Revelation. I cannot reconcile the kindness of a benevolent God, revealed in the form of Jesus, and the violent cruelty of the revelation Jesus.
Maybe the Revelation was the peyote inspired revenge seeking output of the last surviving disciple against the Roman Empire, the Babylonian Whore.
Well, the ignorant fisherman didn't write any of the Bible, for one thing. The Gospels are very sophisticated pieces of writing, in formats that were taught to educated people. The authors put the names of supposed apostles on the Gospels to lend them gravitas, as I explained above. I don't know anything about Lucanus so must pass on opining.
Donna
St. Luke, who wrote Luke and The Acts of the Apostles. He was a Greek MD who was a Jesus biographer through interviews with People who knew Jesus. Most notable was Mary, the mother of Jesus, that is why the Xmas story is in Luke.
John was a fisherman and the longest living of the twelve.
Mark was a companion of Paul, full name John Mark.
Matthew was a tax collector, so very methodical. He was an on site biographer.
Yes, those are the bios given in the book. But there is no proof that any of those people existed. You can't use the book to prove the existence of anything in the book. That's like me saying that Batman is real. There are truckloads of stories about Batman! We know his origin story and his secret identity. We know he fights crime in Gotham City, and we know he exists because Commissioner Gordon, Robin and Alfred have all seen him and interacted with him. It's all in the stories!
It's exactly the same thing. Different proof must be presented to prove the people in the Bible existed and the events happened. To prove someone existed in the ancient world, historians discuss standards of proof. Let's take Julius Caesar. We are sure enough that he existed because we have a great deal of historical evidence. To wit: 1) we have his own prolific writings, 2) contemporary figures such as Cicero, who actually lived during Caesar's time, attested to his deeds and wrote about them, 3) biographies were written after his death (such as by Plutarch), and 4) there is a lot of archaeological evidence such as his image on coinage, statuary, and the Temple of Julius
Caesar.
There is nothing outside of the book to prove the existence of the characters or events in the book.
Right. I wonder how much of the Bible was drug induced.
Two comments, first, the OT God who wipes out civilizations, I wonder how much of that was trying to explain the ability of Hebrews to destroy Kingdoms of the old world by their own story tellers. The Hebrews were powerful and organized behind a common heritage, unlike most of the тАЬtribesтАЭ of the day.
Second, even after New Jerusalem comes down and God moves in, resources to control errant human behavior are in place. So even with he return of Eden, there will be bad people that will be dealt with.
Cank sez:
" I think John was smoking Patmosian peyote when he wrote that thing."
He was definitely tripping on something. I've tried to explain this to many, many Bible-thumpers, but they'll have none of it.
You only believe in the natural or physical world. Thus you are not qualified to speak about religion or the supernatural.
As per usual, you make assumptions about me that are completely wrong.
What is the Levitical punishment? Islam says to cut the hand off. I'd say break the hand the first time. Second time cut it off.