[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 152 KB, 1280x960, exterminatus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3806478 No.3806478 [Reply] [Original]

Christfag here, bringing bad news for all fans of space colonization:
>Assume Bible = True, therefore Book of Revelations = True
>All literal events, such as the seven bowls of wrath and their results, are earth-centric or sol-centric.
>Examples: third of water on the earth turns to blood, third of sun turns dark, third of stars fall from the sky, and others.

>The above would not make sense unless we either never make permanent space colonies, or the end of the world comes after all space colonies have either been decommisioned or destroyed. It also removes the possibility of slowboating cryo-colonists, since the events of Revelations would not and could not effect them.

>I dearly hope I am wrong.

Discuss

>> No.3806492

>Assume Bible = True

no

>> No.3806490

>Assume Bible = True, therefore Book of Revelations = True

There's your problem.

>> No.3806493

>>3806478
Nothing to discuss.

>> No.3806502

>>3806490
>>3806492
You really shouldn't do that. The whole point of hypothetical discussions is to work off of some assumed basic idea, then building on that.
I'm certain that's one of the basic logical fallacies that you aren't supposed to do.

I as just hoping someone like Mad or someone might see this and tell me if an why I would be wrong, assuming this standpoint.

>> No.3806504

>Assume Harold Camping was right
>We're all in heaven, or left on Earth to be tortured

>> No.3806505

Sage the thread instead of bumping it. Just type sage in the E-mail field. It's simple.

>> No.3806508

>>3806502
It doesn't work when your hypothetical point is completely retarded.

>> No.3806515

>>3806502
Discussions, interesting ones, require properly formed axioms.

Your axioms are crap.

>> No.3806516

>Assume Bible = True

Just get the fuck out.

>> No.3806519

>>3806505
we need /sci/ to learn from OP's mistakes.

>> No.3806521

>>3806502
>if an why I would be wrong

Did you know you're in the book of revalations?

And the apostle Doug-E-Fresh said unto God:

'THE STUPID! IT BURNS!'

And God said: 'Anon is like that sometimes.'

>> No.3806522

>>3806508
>>3806515
Discussions require a hypothetical point to begin on. I provided one.
They do not have to be considered 'acceptable' for discussion to occur.

>> No.3806525

>>3806502

You're wrong because you are assuming both a literal nature and an accurate one for the bible. There are so many points at which the bible is demonstrably wrong it's laughable.

Before you get on your "but those parts are metaphorical" high horse, let me point out that Revelation is a vision, if you believe the bible, and it has several mythical beasts in it which most definitely do not exist. If you think it's literal and the story of original sin is a metaphor, you've got bigger things to be worried about than the non-possibility of biblical end-times.

>> No.3806527

>>3806522
Your axioms are crap.

/thread

>> No.3806533

>>3806527
ad hominem

>>3806525
Point to you.

Still, why get buttmad over the bible?

>> No.3806536

>>3806522
What if the Universe was my butthole and i shoved a dragon dildo in it.
Did i move faster than the speed of light?
By your logic this would make great hypothetical discussion.

>> No.3806537

>Assume Harry Potter is true
>Wizards could come kill me in my house and the cops would never catch them.

I really hope I'm wrong about this.

>> No.3806541

>>3806533

I'm not "buttmad" over the bible. Parts of it are quite beautiful as literature, and you really can't understand western history without understanding the bible's role in it. I'm a little bit annoyed by people that still believe it is literal truth when it is most obviously just a collection of stories and moralistic teachings that contain so many innacuracies that it could have been written by jack Chick.

>> No.3806542

>>3806537
Assuming that is true, then yes, wizards could kill you and no one would know.

>> No.3806543

>>3806522
But you're applying the hypothetical situation as if it were real and saying you hope you're wrong.

Most people don't present concern for off the wall hypothetical situations.

>> No.3806547

>>3806533
>why get buttmad over the bible?
Christians who don't even know the scientific method like to come on here and insult science, gossip, and use the lords name in vain for calling science "stupid".

>> No.3806551

>Bible = True
theres your problem.

>> No.3806552

>>3806543
>But you're applying the hypothetical situation as if it were real and saying you hope you're wrong.

That's because I am a Christian. Part of that requires taking the whole of it as truths, though they may be either literal, moral or ethical truths.

I've had no reason to stop being a christian, but the OP realization is depressing, and I hope others may be able to prove my realization is flawed.

>>3806541
> that it could have been written by jack Chick.
The rest of your post I'll grant, because thats your opinion, but FUCK YOU for that last part.

Jack Chick is on par with Fred Phelps in my opinion.

>> No.3806553
File: 5 KB, 125x125, 1314596006103.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3806553

ummm revalations only meant the end of EVERYTHING YOU NOOOOOOOOOOOOO
The new Bible will most likely be available in your local Wal-Mart for the ending of the aztec calender.

>> No.3806555

>>3806547

Man, you're incredibly naive if you think that Christians come to /sci/ to troll atheists.

>> No.3806556

>>3806547
> and use the lords name in vain for calling science "stupid".
...I'm pretty certain those were just trolls.

>> No.3806564
File: 32 KB, 670x515, bible bans.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3806564

the thing about the Bible is that it's impossible to tell what you're supposed to take literally and what's metaphorical.

For example, depending on which Gospel you read, Jesus says different things during his crucifixion. So you can't take anything he says there as being his literal last words.

So is the Book of Revelations supposed to be literal or metaphorical? Or both? Different theologians will give you different answers. This is how shit like the great schism and the protestant reformation happens.

Welcome to the Bible, where nothing is straight forward.

>> No.3806570

0/10
>2011
>still taking bible literally
lrn2 modern theology.

>> No.3806575
File: 47 KB, 640x329, 1315708336040.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3806575

>>3806555
i wouldnt say "troll atheist" but anyone who doesnt know that there is someone out there behind everything we know is a fucking rere. Big magic man made lil magic man who cant see the magic of Big magic man.

>> No.3806573

>>3806555
I said -SCIENCE-, not atheists.

You buttfustrated heretic.

>> No.3806574

>>3806564

Leviticus hates fun.

>> No.3806579

>>3806574
Deuteronomy makes up for it. That shit is crazy.

>> No.3806583

>>3806579
Read Job.

>> No.3806586

>>3806552
I think your realization is flawed because you're basing it off the bible.

You're saying that some old book written by bronze age people says some vague stuff about disasters on Earth, then asking why it doesn't talk about space. Wow, did you ever think that people in that time never fathomed that we could go to other planets? Nah, that can't be it.

>> No.3806589

>>3806552

The bible is on the same level for accuracy. I don't mean to be insulting, but it really is.

>There is no water above the "firmament" of heaven. Hell, there is no firmament.
>God created the day and night cycle on day 1 f creation, but created the sun on day four?
>God hung the sun, moon, and stars as lights, even though we know the moon isn't a light at all, and there's nothing lesser about the stars.
>Adam and Eve never existed, according to genetic testing of people from all over the world (look up mitochondrial eve and Y-chromosomal Adam)
>The sun cannot stop in the sky, as is depicted in the story of one of the Old Testament battles. What would've had to happen is that the earth would've had to stop spinning and moving in its orbit, which would've caused world-wide natural disasters.

I could go on, but really, why bother?

>> No.3806590

And everything ITT has nothing to do with science.

I'll capslock so you don't miss the point.

AND
EVERYTHING
I.T.T.
HAS
NOTHING
TO
DO
WITH
SCIENCE!

>> No.3806592

>>3806586
>t time never fathomed that we could go to other planets? Nah, that can't be it.
I considered that somewhat, because, you know, assuming it IS true, then the visions would have to make sense to them 0 AD folks.

Maybe.... i'll be back in sec.

>> No.3806601

>>3806592
Alright, looking at the Trumpets, bowls of wrath, and plagues, I think i can make it make sense if God were to make them happen by subverting man's technology.

Still doesn't change my realization about no space habs though.

>> No.3806606

>>3806592
Maybe the visions were of a different planet and they thought blood water and shit were curses, but in reality that's just what the new planet we were living on looked like.

Like it has red water, a smaller sun, and is in a part of the universe where less stars are visible.

>> No.3806611

>>3806601
>I think i can make it make sense if

Dude, naw. You're better than this. EVERYONE is better than this.

>> No.3806615

>>3806606
Very iffy. Although the whole chebang ending with the odl earth destroyed and a new one in it's place.

However, it also mentions how the heavens are destroyed and replaced too, so it doesn't quite work.

>> No.3806618

>>3806611
>Dude, naw. You're better than this. EVERYONE is better than this.
I'm a Christian, bro. Part of what I do is take the world and make it fit my reality. Within reason.
So far, not too many things have clashed.

>> No.3806623

>>3806589

/thread

>> No.3806628

>>3806615
Isn't heavens just another term for skies?

Although if you're just saying it says the old Earth is destroyed and a new one is in it's place, then doesn't that sound like the Earth was going to end, so we went and found a different planet to live on and it became the "new earth".

>> No.3806634

>>3806589
Oh shit bro, I missed your post. Sorry.

>>God created the day and night cycle on day 1 f creation, but created the sun on day four?
He didn't create the day/night cycle on the first day. He gave light rules of behavior that could provide the effect of night.
>>God hung the sun, moon, and stars as lights, even though we know the moon isn't a light at all, and there's nothing lesser about the stars.
Obvious metaphor
>>Adam and Eve never existed, according to genetic testing of people from all over the world (look up mitochondrial eve and Y-chromosomal Adam)
I will, i haven't heard much of this.
Although, remember that biblically, we all came from Noah. Massive bottleneck there.
>>The sun cannot stop in the sky, as is depicted in the story of one of the Old Testament battles. What would've had to happen is that the earth would've had to stop spinning and moving in its orbit, which would've caused world-wide natural disasters.
God did it. Its a 'it's magic, aint gotta explain shit" situation. however i remember reading an article describing an odd blip in the predicted cycle of the earth, which would only exist if it just stopped for a second. Din;t make much of it.

>> No.3806645

>>3806628
Odd take on it, but I'll look into it.

>> No.3806650

>>3806634

Quoting Genesis 1, verses 3-5
> 3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

>> No.3806652

>>3806634
Are you serious?

Mostly the sun moves so slowly through the sky that you wouldn't even notice if it did stop.

But as it was said the Earth would have to stop spinning to stop the sun in the sky, which would destroy everything on the face of the planet.

It's an idiotic story from people who thought the earth was stationary in the center and the sun just flew across the horizon.

>> No.3806659

>>3806650
>God did it. Its a 'it's magic, aint gotta explain shit" situation. however i remember reading an article describing an odd blip in the predicted cycle of the earth, which would only exist if it just stopped for a second. Din;t make much of it.

No, He didn't, because He is not real. Your "blip" will also be considered a fabrication, or at the most charitable, wishful thinking, until you provide a source.

>> No.3806664

>>3806650
>Quoting Genesis 1, verses 3-5
Well, shit. I haven't read that in a while.
My idea still stands, i think. The description of an evening and morning is probably supposed to be a standard idea of time.
Thats a pile of metaphorical shit I'm not getting into right now.

>>3806652
>But as it was said the Earth would have to stop spinning to stop the sun in the sky, which would destroy everything on the face of the planet.
Again, God did it. That's the definition of a literal miracle.

>Your "blip" will also be considered a fabrication, or at the most charitable, wishful thinking, until you provide a source.
I'm alright with that. Citation is important, and anything without context is worhtless.

>> No.3806681
File: 50 KB, 420x420, ftt.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3806681

>>3806664

Sigh. This is the typical religious person's response when confronted with fact that contradicts their holy books. "No, it's literal truth." "Wait a second, I changed my mind, it's metaphor." "Wait a second, some of it is literal and some is metaphor."

>> No.3806682

>>3806664
and without any evidence, it's bullshit.

>> No.3806679

Back onto the OP topic.

Does the literal translation of the events in the book of revelations allow for space/extraplanetary habitats at the time of the end of the world?
>sethers exclaimed

>> No.3806688

>>3806679

Yes. The bible never says God will destroy our "wicked colonies on Mar" or anything like it. Just earth.

>> No.3806696

>>3806688

"colonies on Mars" rather. Fuck my typing.

>> No.3806704

>>3806681
>This is the typical religious person's response when confronted with fact that contradicts their holy books. "No, it's literal truth." "Wait a second, I changed my mind, it's metaphor." "Wait a second, some of it is literal and some is metaphor."

Sucks, doesn't it? We don't like it either, yet for some reason we are compelled to do so. I blame it on the fact that most of humanity, such as my self, have a stronger sense of nihilism than ambition to live, thus they need religion to guide or blind them from the soul-crushing nature of our current reality with the hopes of a better one.

>>3806688
>>3806696
Well, yes, this is true. I'm just concerned by the fact that these are supposed to be punishments for humanity for not repenting before the time came, but now all those people in space get of scott free?

Seems incomplete.

>> No.3806721

>>3806704
while I'm waiting, i'm reading bittersweetcandybowl.
It's like i'm vicariously living through all the high school drama I purposefully avoided by having no social contact during my four years there.

>> No.3806726

>>3806704

There's a reason it seems incomplete. It IS incomplete. There was no concept of living on other planets at the time the Hebrews invented God, so there was no way to account for the fact that they would exist. Hell, they didn't even know the other planets existed at the time. They would've at most seen them as signs in the sky, with no concept of them being even solid in some cases.

You know down deep this is true, and you know down deep what it means. That's why you're even thinking about it, trying to "make it fit." Your rational mind knows it DOES NOT fit, and that this is the card that will send the whole house tumbling down for you. It's a different one for everybody.

>> No.3806746

>>3806726
>You know down deep this is true, and you know down deep what it means. That's why you're even thinking about it, trying to "make it fit." Your rational mind knows it DOES NOT fit, and that this is the card that will send the whole house tumbling down for you. It's a different one for everybody.
This is what it feels like is happening. but then again, despite being terrible at Tetris, I am very good at making things fit where they normally won't.

For example, space habs could simply have been destroyed or decommisioned by that point, or otherwise destroyed by cosmological incidents.

I just hate the fact that it all seems to imply that we will probably never expand beyond the earth. It's not enough to make me leave my faith, but damn does it hurt.

>> No.3806757

>>3806746
>For example, space habs could simply have been destroyed or decommisioned by that point, or otherwise destroyed by cosmological incidents.

On that point that idea still bugs me because god said the end times would be 'Soon'.
That's it. Now granted its only been 2000 years, but at this rate we will be out of this world and it will be a whole 'nother ball game, which implies that 'Soon' will happen before that genre shift occurs. Probably within the next century, i.e. my liftetime.

>> No.3806790

>>3806746
>>3806757
bump