Thursday, January 24, 2008

Mark, chapter 13

24 "But in those days, after that tribulation, THE SUN WILL BE DARKENED AND THE MOON WILL NOT GIVE ITS LIGHT, 25 AND THE STARS WILL BE FALLING from heaven, and the powers that are in the heavens will be shaken.
Hm, seems like astronomy wasn't Jesus' favorite subject in school. How could stars fall from the sky? Stars are distant suns. They cannot just fall from heaven.
30 "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.
Another prophecy of Jesus that didn't hold up. There have been lots of generations since then that have passed away.
32 "But of that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone.
Take that, Trinity! If the Son doesn't know what the Father knows then both can't be the same. Or the Father withholds information from the Son but if the Son is identical to the Father then the Father is withholding information from himself. Eh, yeah, that makes lots of sense. Again. The biblical authors really should have taken a course in elementary logic before inventing confusing concepts like this. On the other hand Jesus never claimed to be a part of the Trinity. That whole concept was made up later by the Church to keep their theology from imploding.

16 comments:

Anonymous said...

first time reader and I read this, and read no further

"Hm, seems like astronomy wasn't Jesus' favorite subject in school. How could stars fall from the sky? Stars are distant suns. They cannot just fall from heaven."

Im sorry I can not tolerate this kind of blind ignorance. You know its meaning and yet try and find some/any fault. Do you in all seriousness believe Jesus was giving an astronomy lesson here? Another question, whats the Ancient Aramaic word for meteorite? I was just wondering!

et real with yourself! I really mean that! GET REAL!

Daldianus said...

Dear anonymous:

That verse clearly shows that Jesus thought that the stars were hanging above the (flat) Earth. otherwise he would have found much better analogies.

The Gospels were written in Greek, not Aramaic. The greek word used here is 'aster' which means 'star', and not meteorite.

I suggest you just get real! :)

Wonders for Oyarsa said...

That verse clearly shows that Jesus thought that the stars were hanging above the (flat) Earth. otherwise he would have found much better analogies.

Doubtless he would have...had he been talking to you. But he was talking to first-century Jews - a concept that you seem to have trouble getting your head around here.

Daldianus said...

>Doubtless he would have...had he been talking to you. But he was talking to first-century Jews - a concept that you seem to have trouble getting your head around here.

So Jesus lied to them because they couldn't understand it better? Is that also why the creation account is so messed up?

But why not use better allegories or immages then?

And if these these stories were meant for first century Jews then why should I take them serious or literal in the first place? They just look like stories for and from superstitious people that had extremely limited knowledge about things.

mainecaptain said...

Going by how it is written I would say it (bible) was written expressly for those of the time and not for future generations. (To try and interpret correctly)

They would understand the wording. And not take with such literal meaning. They were just stories of the time IMO

Could be wrong but I doubt anyone of that time, would have expected these stories to be used the way they are today

Wonders for Oyarsa said...

So Jesus lied to them because they couldn't understand it better? Is that also why the creation account is so messed up?

Yes. Just like physics professors lie to you when they first have you picture atoms as balls, and then as little solar systems, and only later as probability clouds. How awful of them to lie like that.

But why not use better allegories or immages then?

Would you really expect to learn a thing about atoms if you started with the Schrodenger waveform equation? Daldianus, this is the way someone who knows more teaches someone who knows less.

And if these these stories were meant for first century Jews then why should I take them serious or literal in the first place? They just look like stories for and from superstitious people that had extremely limited knowledge about things.

That can be your attitude, I suppose. It's a common one - that you and your contemporaries know all you need to know, and that everyone else is hopelessly deficient. Sort of like saying "if anyone had anything useful to say, they'd say it in English".

I can't force you to respect ancient people and to want to understand them. But until you choose to develop this desire, you will not be encountering what you are reading - you will continue to engage in a game of close-minded self-congratulation.

Daldianus said...

maine:

>Going by how it is written I would say it (bible) was written expressly for those of the time and not for future generations. (To try and interpret correctly)

I agree. His apocalyptic visions definitely describe things that were thought to be imminent!

Daldianus said...

wonders:

>Yes. Just like physics professors lie to you when they first have you picture atoms as balls, and then as little solar systems, and only later as probability clouds. How awful of them to lie like that.

So you agree that the Earth wasn't created in 6 days? And how could there be light if the sun got created later?

>Daldianus, this is the way someone who knows more teaches someone who knows less.

He could just have said that meteorites would fall on the Earth. That would have been correct and what would have been difficult to understand about that? And it would as false as pretending that stars could fall on the Earth.

>That can be your attitude, I suppose. It's a common one - that you and your contemporaries know all you need to know, and that everyone else is hopelessly deficient. Sort of like saying "if anyone had anything useful to say, they'd say it in English".

No. I'm just using rationality, logic and common sense. I don't see why I should believe in invisible men and magic when there is no evidence for this?

>I can't force you to respect ancient people and to want to understand them.

I can understand and respect them as the superstitious people they were and with the limited knowledge that they had. They were good people, they didn't know it better.

Wonders for Oyarsa said...

So you agree that the Earth wasn't created in 6 days? And how could there be light if the sun got created later?

Of course I don't believe that. Why on Earth would you suspect I did? Ah, yes - your unquestioning assumptions.

He could just have said that meteorites would fall on the Earth. That would have been correct and what would have been difficult to understand about that? And it would as false as pretending that stars could fall on the Earth.

But he wasn't talking about meteorites. He was talking about the collapse of the present powers and kingdoms and authorities - which were connected to the heavens in the ancient mindset. Talking about rocks falling onto the Earth would have been irrelevant to his message.

No. I'm just using rationality, logic and common sense. I don't see why I should believe in invisible men and magic when there is no evidence for this?

Again, no one is asking you to believe anything. At least I'm not.

I can understand and respect them as the superstitious people they were and with the limited knowledge that they had. They were good people, they didn't know it better.

You don't understand them. You don't have an appreciation for how they viewed the world and what kind of language they used. You look down on them due to stereotypes, but you don't have a real appreciation for them. If you did, you might pause to think about what a statement about a fig tree would mean to them, rather than complain about it meaning nothing to you. You might wonder what the stars symbolized to them, rather than what they mean to you.

Daldianus said...

wonders:

>Of course I don't believe that. Why on Earth would you suspect I did? Ah, yes - your unquestioning assumptions.

I might have been hanging out too much with american fundies ;)

So how do you decide what is literal and what is allegorical?

>But he wasn't talking about meteorites. He was talking about the collapse of the present powers and kingdoms and authorities - which were connected to the heavens in the ancient mindset. Talking about rocks falling onto the Earth would have been irrelevant to his message.

But would this end come by magical means or not? And the metaphor about the stars is still based on limited knowledge about astronomy.

>Again, no one is asking you to believe anything. At least I'm not.

Ok, fair enough. But I'm curious: Do you think I'll go to Hell for that? Assuming for now that Hell exists?

>You don't understand them. You don't have an appreciation for how they viewed the world and what kind of language they used. You look down on them due to stereotypes, but you don't have a real appreciation for them. If you did, you might pause to think about what a statement about a fig tree would mean to them, rather than complain about it meaning nothing to you. You might wonder what the stars symbolized to them, rather than what they mean to you.

Where did I say that it didn't mean something to them? I was just pointing out that the way it is phrased it makes look Jesus stupid since he curses the tree for its NORMAL behavior (=not having fruit out of season).

Wonders for Oyarsa said...

I might have been hanging out too much with american fundies ;)

So how do you decide what is literal and what is allegorical?


Mostly by studying how the people of the time would have read the text. What did those sorts of words mean to them?

But would this end come by magical means or not? And the metaphor about the stars is still based on limited knowledge about astronomy.

I don't think they would have had any context for the "magical". They would have said that the powers that be would fall, and that that would be the doing of God. The metaphor may reflect limited knowledge (though even today we might talk about something being an "earth-shattering event"), but we ourselves have limited knowledge and doubtless do that as well. If we say that God shouldn't have talked to them in ways they could understand, we make the same case against ourselves.

Ok, fair enough. But I'm curious: Do you think I'll go to Hell for that? Assuming for now that Hell exists?

No. I'm sure there are FAR better reasons for you to go to Hell. ;-)

Just kidding - well, half kidding. I don't think its appropriate of brining up the judgment of God in a context of what people honestly believe to be true about the world. It is appropriate when we talk about injustice and evil, and there is certainly a danger that we think ourselves personally exempt from these things. But I would never suggest anyone choose to believe in God for fear of Hell.

Where did I say that it didn't mean something to them? I was just pointing out that the way it is phrased it makes look Jesus stupid since he curses the tree for its NORMAL behavior (=not having fruit out of season).

It's you who jump to the conclusion of stupidity. Jesus isn't stupid - I assure you he knew that fruit doesn't grow in the wrong season. Had Jerusalem been ready and able to receive him, he probably would have waited a few months, picked up some fresh figs, and blessed the fig tree for its fruitfulness. That's the way Jewish prophets did things - they acted their messages out with symbols.

Daldianus said...

wonders:

Mostly by studying how the people of the time would have read the text. What did those sorts of words mean to them?

How can you study what those words mean to them if you don't have their explanations on them?

I don't think they would have had any context for the "magical".

Huh? Their whole world view was magical. Demons, angels, divine interventions, etc were omnipresent.

They would have said that the powers that be would fall, and that that would be the doing of God.

Read the whole text again. It is meant literally and it was a warning for an apocalypse that would soon come. Jesus even tells them where to run to when these things happen.

If we say that God shouldn't have talked to them in ways they could understand, we make the same case against ourselves.

The way the story is told makes it obvious that Jesus thought that the actual, real end of the world was coming soon. If one takes it symbolically there are too many elements that don't make sense and wouldn't be needed to make the point that you're assuming he wanted to make.

But I would never suggest anyone choose to believe in God for fear of Hell.

I'm sure a lot of people believe in your God for fear of Hell (and Death in general). And your God makes it clear, since he gives a dictatorial choice: Believe in me and survive or deny me and be annihilated. Reminds me of Saddam Hussein actually.

It's you who jump to the conclusion of stupidity. Jesus isn't stupid - I assure you he knew that fruit doesn't grow in the wrong season.

So why was he angry about it and damned the tree for it? So why was he angry at Israel when Israel wasn't having fruits (which wasn't a choice Israel made since the tree also does not choose to not have fruits out of season)? It's simply a bad analogy that doesn't make sense and is inherently flawed.

Had Jerusalem been ready and able to receive him, he probably would have waited a few months, picked up some fresh figs, and blessed the fig tree for its fruitfulness. That's the way Jewish prophets did things - they acted their messages out with symbols.

Again, the symbol (cursing a tree for behaving NORMALLY, for behaving the way it always does) is stupid and makes no sense. How can you expect something from something that goes against its nature? That's like cursing a dog for not being a cow!

Wonders for Oyarsa said...

Well Daldianus, I'm parting ways. Enjoy your simple, clear, clean view of the world and ridiculing everyone else for being fools. Perhaps as you grow older you will develop some genuine curiosity of what other people think.

Daldianus said...

wonders:

So you give up? As you wish.

Have a nice day :)

ankitagoyal said...

Bulk Email Services In Locknow
Bulk Email Services In Kanpur
Bulk Email Services In Ghaziabad
Bulk Email Services In Agra
Bulk Email Services In Meerut
Bulk Email Services In Gujarat
Bulk Email Services in Ahmedabad
Bulk Email Services In Surat
Bulk Email Services In Vadodara
Bulk Email Services In Rajkot
Bulk Email Services In Gandhinagar
Bulk Email Services In Rajasthan
Bulk Email Services In Jaipur
Bulk Email Services In Ajmer
BULK EMAIL SERVICES IN UDAIPUR
BULK EMAIL SERVICES IN ALWAR
BULK EMAIL SERVICES IN MAHARASHTRA
BULK EMAIL SERVICES IN THANE
BULK EMAIL SERVICES IN Mumbai
Bulk Email Services in Pune
Bulk Email Services in Nasik
BULK EMAIL SERVICES IN NAGPUR
Bulk email Services in Bihar
Bulk email Services in patna
Bulk email Services in bangalore
Bulk email Services in KOLKATA
Bulk email Services in ANDHRA PRADESH
Bulk email Services in HYDERABAD
Email Service Provider
Email Services
Email Database
Bulk Email Marketing

ankitagoyal said...

Bulk Email Services In Locknow
Bulk Email Services In Kanpur
Bulk Email Services In Ghaziabad
Bulk Email Services In Agra
Bulk Email Services In Meerut
Bulk Email Services In Gujarat
Bulk Email Services in Ahmedabad
Bulk Email Services In Surat
Bulk Email Services In Vadodara
Bulk Email Services In Rajkot
Bulk Email Services In Gandhinagar
Bulk Email Services In Rajasthan
Bulk Email Services In Jaipur
Bulk Email Services In Ajmer
BULK EMAIL SERVICES IN UDAIPUR
BULK EMAIL SERVICES IN ALWAR
BULK EMAIL SERVICES IN MAHARASHTRA
BULK EMAIL SERVICES IN THANE
BULK EMAIL SERVICES IN Mumbai
Bulk Email Services in Pune
Bulk Email Services in Nasik
BULK EMAIL SERVICES IN NAGPUR
Bulk email Services in Bihar
Bulk email Services in patna
Bulk email Services in bangalore
Bulk email Services in KOLKATA
Bulk email Services in ANDHRA PRADESH
Bulk email Services in HYDERABAD
Email Service Provider
Email Services
Email Database
Bulk Email Marketing