The Book of Revelation: Mystery Or Profitable?

[fzappa13]

Ferrous Cranus

 

[Clete]

Ferrous Cranus

Translation: "I've run completely out of anything substantive to say so I'm going to resort to ad hominems."

Hypocrite!

 

[fzappa13]

This sort of thing is the main reason I consent to participate in discussions with conspiracy theorists. They are their own best refutation. It's never very long before they begin to just sound completely ridiculous.

What Jesus said in Matthew 6 has exactly NOTHING to do with what we're talking about. Jesus was making reference to the fools who went around town making themselves look conspicuously pious when they were actually the opposite of that. Jesus wasn't teaching against piety, He was teaching against being pretentious and hypocritical. He certainly was not prohibiting public fundraising efforts intended to help sick children!

Do you have even one piece of evidence to present that the Shriners aren't really that interested in helping sick children?

NO! You sure as hell do not!

I, on the other hand, can offer first person testimony! I know by my own personal experience and knowledge that the Shriners take their members to Children's hospitals so that they can see first hand the work that is being done; so that they can meet the children and see for themselves the effect that the money they raise has on them and their families. I can tell you, because I saw with my own eyes the tears in my father's eyes when his efforts raised more than four times the amount of money that they had expected to raise one summer when they invested a bunch of their own personal money (i.e. not the shrine's money but money that came out of my dad's own pocket) to buy and then sell fireworks for the fourth of July.

All I did was offer the words of Jesus without comment. If you've got a problem with those words you need to take it up with He who said it. Not me. Who knows, maybe He'll grant you an exemption to those words for Shriners.

 

[fzappa13]

" ad hominems." "Hypocrite!" Ummmmm. OK.

 

[Right Divider]

All I did was offer the words of Jesus without comment.

Why would you do that?
Why do people quote the Bible in the first place?

If you've got a problem with those words you need to take it up with He who said it. Not me.

Another false accusation.

Who knows, maybe He'll grant you an exemption to those words for Shriners.

You write like a child because you think like a child. You need to grow up.

 

[Clete]

All I did was offer the words of Jesus without comment. If you've got a problem with those words you need to take it up with He who said it. Not me. Who knows, maybe He'll grant you an exemption to those words for Shriners.

That isn't all you did and you know it. Don't destroy what has been at least a somewhat descent discussion by stooping to stupidity and lies.

You presented those words in response to my pointing out that Freemasons and Shriners in particular do a great deal of good when it comes to helping sick children, free of charge. The implication being that it was some sort of ruse to trick everyone into thinking that they are something that they aren't, which is the only way that passage could possibly have been relevant.

 

[Clete]

Calling someone who a hypocrite who is being hypocritical ISN'T an ad hominem!

Good Lord please somehow have people figure out what "ad hominem" means before letting them post stupidity like this on the internet!!!!!

 

[Clete]

Is there anything someone want to post on this topic that isn't mindless stupidity or are we finished here?

 

[Idolater]

On more than one occasion Jesus would segue from conversation to prophesy without using a turn signal and I think this one of those occasions.

That's a nice metaphor. Props.

I had not thought of looking at the subject of thirds from the other side of the equation. Nice catch.

Didn't you just suggest that two-thirds of the angels were not swept away by Satan's tail, and that two-thirds of mankind will perish eternally? Isn't that the same side of the equation? I must be misunderstanding. Where's that "eek" emoji when you need it. Could you explain?

 

[Idolater]

Calling someone [a] hypocrite who is being hypocritical ISN'T an ad hominem!

Totally agree. Otherwise Jesus committed ad hominem all the time. And that's impossible. We measure logic according to His measuring tape:

Whatever we know about logic, we know Jesus Christ is not illogical;
So therefore nothing He ever said or did could possibly be illogical, and
if it appears so, then you need to study harder to understand.
Because whatever we know about logic, we know Jesus Christ is not illogical and that therefore nothing He ever said or did could possibly be illogical, so study harder to understand.

If Jesus said it, it's not ad hominem.

Good Lord please somehow have people figure out what "ad hominem" means before letting them post stupidity like this on the internet!!!!!

Whereas this is.

 

[fzappa13]

Didn't you just suggest that two-thirds of the angels were not swept away by Satan's tail, and that two-thirds of mankind will perish eternally? Isn't that the same side of the equation? I must be misunderstanding. Where's that "eek" emoji when you need it. Could you explain?

What you said is implied in what I said I just didn't appreciate the implications until you pointed them out. Now instead of simply doing research on the thirds I need to research 2/3s. I'm always looking for another angle from which to approach understanding the Bible and you just gave me one. Thanks.

 

[Idolater]

Ferrous Cranus

@john w was the best I ever saw or interacted with. He just destroyed opposition.

Your link is fascinating because it captures part of what the very first generation of social media users experienced, during a brief and limited time. Who knows when that era officially ended, but it's sure over now. People would just air all kinds of dirty laundry out for the whole World to see, hiding behind anonymity. I mean, except for those who doxed themselves (some people used their real names irl names). But even then, social media has a way of putting all content into a blender and hitting puree.

 

[fzappa13]

@john w was the best I ever saw or interacted with. He just destroyed opposition.

Your link is fascinating because it captures part of what the very first generation of social media users experienced, during a brief and limited time. Who knows when that era officially ended, but it's sure over now. People would just air all kinds of dirty laundry out for the whole World to see, hiding behind anonymity. I mean, except for those who doxed themselves (some people used their real names irl names). But even then, social media has a way of putting all content into a blender and hitting puree.

I offered Mike a few suggestions that he wound up incorporating into his list of characters. By the time he did the list he had already retired from the fray. It's funny how well these characters fit any given site. There were many more back then. Speaking for myself I was excited by the potential of the medium for learning and growth but eventually it settled into so many contending camps/individuals simply engaged in defending doctrinal turf. It was hard for me to maintain a great deal of interest in that so my participation waned. I figured that once the events of end time prophecy started shaping up to the point it was no longer viable to deny it I would attempt to reengage. I'll be curious to see if others do likewise. There were some really interesting posters here 20 years ago.

 

[Clete]

Totally agree. Otherwise Jesus committed ad hominem all the time. And that's impossible. We measure logic according to His measuring tape:

Whatever we know about logic, we know Jesus Christ is not illogical;
So therefore nothing He ever said or did could possibly be illogical, and
if it appears so, then you need to study harder to understand.
Because whatever we know about logic, we know Jesus Christ is not illogical and that therefore nothing He ever said or did could possibly be illogical, so study harder to understand.

If Jesus said it, it's not ad hominem.


Whereas this is.

No it isn't! That's just ridiculous!

How on planet Earth could it be a ad hominem to lament the near continuous and almost universal misuse of the term "ad hominem"? People throw the term around exactly as if it is synonymous with calling someone a name. IT ISN'T! That isn't what it means! And no matter how many times you tell people, including both you and fzappa13, it doesn't sink in because neither of you want it to sink in because any excuse you can find to type something in Latin makes you feel smarter than you know you are.

 

[Clete]

Because whatever we know about logic, we know Jesus Christ is not illogical and that therefore nothing He ever said or did could possibly be illogical, so study harder to understand.

This statement is more true than you're likely willing to admit!

Jesus wasn't simply logical, He is Logic!

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.​

That's how the New King James renders the passage but the use of "Word" is incorrect. The Greek word "Logos" does not mean the same thing as the English "Word". It means "Reason" or "Logic" and since most translators of ancient works like to use transliteration whenever possible, the use of "Logic" would probably be the best translation. Thus...

John 1:1 In the beginning was Logic, and Logic was with God, and Logic was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.​

​

The definite article is present in the original language and so a very literal translation would say "In the beginning was the Logic...." but it isn't necessary to use the article in English because it is implied by the context.

"Logos" is where we get the suffix "ology" from as in biology, for example. "Bio" means "life" and "ology" means "logic of", thus biology is the logic of living things. The word "theology" is the English version of "theos" + "logos", the logic of God. Jesus, on the otherhand is not the logos OF The Theos, but rather John tells us that the Logos itself was God Himself. "λόγος ἦν θεὸς"; "Logos en Theos"; "Logic was God".

So, yes indeed! Jesus was very logical. Indeed, He was THE Logic become flesh! (John 1:14)

 

[Idolater]

No it isn't! That's just ridiculous!

Clete, you call people stupid!

That's an ad hominem!

Jesus called people actors, and hypocrites, but the closest thing to Him calling someone stupid was when He said if you call someone stupid you're going to Hell!

How on planet Earth could it be a ad hominem to lament the near continuous and almost universal misuse of the term "ad hominem"? People throw the term around exactly as if it is synonymous with calling someone a name. IT ISN'T! That isn't what it means! And no matter how many times you tell people, including both you and fzappa13, it doesn't sink in because neither of you want it to sink in because any excuse you can find to type something in Latin makes you feel smarter than you know you are.

That is a lie, and another ad hominem.

 

[Idolater]

This statement is more true than you're likely willing to admit!

You're right.

Jesus wasn't simply logical, He is Logic!

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.​

That's how the New King James renders the passage but the use of "Word" is incorrect. The Greek word "Logos" does not mean the same thing as the English "Word". It means "Reason" or "Logic" and since most translators of ancient works like to use transliteration whenever possible, the use of "Logic" would probably be the best translation. Thus...

John 1:1 In the beginning was Logic, and Logic was with God, and Logic was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.​

​

The definite article is present in the original language and so a very literal translation would say "In the beginning was the Logic...." but it isn't necessary to use the article in English because it is implied by the context.

"Logos" is where we get the suffix "ology" from as in biology, for example. "Bio" means "life" and "ology" means "logic of", thus biology is the logic of living things. The word "theology" is the English version of "theos" + "logos", the logic of God. Jesus, on the otherhand is not the logos OF The Theos, but rather John tells us that the Logos itself was God Himself. "λόγος ἦν θεὸς"; "Logos en Theos"; "Logic was God".

So, yes indeed! Jesus was very logical. Indeed, He was THE Logic become flesh! (John 1:14)

You're the only one in the World who thinks that.

 

[Idolater]

I offered Mike a few suggestions that he wound up incorporating into his list of characters. By the time he did the list he had already retired from the fray. It's funny how well these characters fit any given site. There were many more back then.

I think they're all still around, they're just all on another platform somewhere. Leopards don't change their spots. I think it's way easier to avoid them on something like the micro-blog platform over there, because you can curate your tl basically, using that block feature. Here, you can use the ignore feature, but any visitor to TOL is going to see everybody's content, even if all the other users are ignoring one user, TOL visitors will see that user's content.

Speaking for myself I was excited by the potential of the medium for learning and growth but eventually it settled into so many contending camps/individuals simply engaged in defending doctrinal turf. It was hard for me to maintain a great deal of interest in that so my participation waned. I figured that once the events of end time prophecy started shaping up to the point it was no longer viable to deny it I would attempt to reengage. I'll be curious to see if others do likewise. There were some really interesting posters here 20 years ago.

I was here 20 years ago but was not really interesting.

 

[JudgeRightly]

You're the only one in the World who thinks that.

Wrong.

Also, even if he was, so what?

 

[fzappa13]

This statement is more true than you're likely willing to admit!

Jesus wasn't simply logical, He is Logic!

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.​

That's how the New King James renders the passage but the use of "Word" is incorrect. The Greek word "Logos" does not mean the same thing as the English "Word". It means "Reason" or "Logic" and since most translators of ancient works like to use transliteration whenever possible, the use of "Logic" would probably be the best translation. Thus...

John 1:1 In the beginning was Logic, and Logic was with God, and Logic was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.​

​

The definite article is present in the original language and so a very literal translation would say "In the beginning was the Logic...." but it isn't necessary to use the article in English because it is implied by the context.

"Logos" is where we get the suffix "ology" from as in biology, for example. "Bio" means "life" and "ology" means "logic of", thus biology is the logic of living things. The word "theology" is the English version of "theos" + "logos", the logic of God. Jesus, on the otherhand is not the logos OF The Theos, but rather John tells us that the Logos itself was God Himself. "λόγος ἦν θεὸς"; "Logos en Theos"; "Logic was God".

So, yes indeed! Jesus was very logical. Indeed, He was THE Logic become flesh! (John 1:14)

I remember something around 20 years ago I made mention of the notion you might be a Star Trek fan because your Icon then looked somewhat like the playing surface on Triskelion. Now I'm sure of it ... this is pure Spock.