Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2018 23:27:47 GMT
No. You can read the stuff that is specifically written there and give it a name for convenience. Because if you didn't give it a name for the sake of convenience, you'd have to say "When it comes to that event that is described as 'For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord,' I totally believe in mid-trib." and that would be make you talk like some kind of asshole. But that has to be an interpretation, I mean there are scholars who believe that the revelation (for example) is actually an account of the fall of the first temple. <shrugs shoulders> What do I care about someone's bad interpretation of the Bible? We've been through this already. Why even range wildly off topic like this? The OP is talking about chip implementation within the context of dystopia. The only reason I even mentioned trilogy and rapture was as an illustration to Puff the Magic Idiot that his intellectual dishonesty wasn't going to pass me by.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 14, 2018 23:29:48 GMT
But that has to be an interpretation, I mean there are scholars who believe that the revelation (for example) is actually an account of the fall of the first temple. <shrugs shoulders> What do I care about someone's bad interpretation of the Bible? We've been through this already. Why even range wildly off topic like this? The OP is talking about chip implementation within the context of dystopia. The only reason I even mentioned trilogy and rapture was as an illustration to Puff the Magic Idiot that his intellectual dishonesty wasn't going to pass me by. I was interested in something you said, conversations flow, they change topic. How do you know an interpretation is good or bad?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2018 23:32:24 GMT
<shrugs shoulders> What do I care about someone's bad interpretation of the Bible? We've been through this already. Why even range wildly off topic like this? The OP is talking about chip implementation within the context of dystopia. The only reason I even mentioned trilogy and rapture was as an illustration to Puff the Magic Idiot that his intellectual dishonesty wasn't going to pass me by. I was interested in something you said, conversations flow, they change topic. How do you know an interpretation is good or bad? Context.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2018 23:33:36 GMT
.....that the future is here. It isn't cyberpunk sci-fi any longer. Enjoy. The microchips and the gadgets to implant them are waiting in their sealed packages. Thousands of them to be sure, and millions more are on the way. It may take a while but they will be used eventually. Will one of them be used on you? This has been a public service announcement from your friendly neighborhood Erjen. It's the number 666. It's the latest phase.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 14, 2018 23:40:25 GMT
I was interested in something you said, conversations flow, they change topic. How do you know an interpretation is good or bad? Context. Context with the rest of the bible, Context with what you already believe? What makes the context? I am genuinely interested because knowing who is interpreting correctly is an interesting thing for me
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2018 23:45:54 GMT
Context with the rest of the bible, Context with what you already believe? What makes the context? I am genuinely interested because knowing who is interpreting correctly is an interesting thing for me The only context that matters when one is working on an interpretation of the Bible: biblical context.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 14, 2018 23:51:34 GMT
Context with the rest of the bible, Context with what you already believe? What makes the context? I am genuinely interested because knowing who is interpreting correctly is an interesting thing for me The only context that matters when one is working on an interpretation of the Bible: biblical context. But then people say things like when homosexuality is mentioned in leviticus it is in the context of pagan rituals and not applicable out side of that, or the whole thing about revelation, meaning there is not real biblical context for revelation, it stands on it's own. What do you think about trying to understand the bible in the context of the time it was written and the people it was written for?.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2018 23:57:32 GMT
The only context that matters when one is working on an interpretation of the Bible: biblical context. But then people say things like when homosexuality is mentioned in leviticus it is in the context of pagan rituals and not applicable out side of that, or the whole thing about revelation, meaning there is not real biblical context for revelation, it stands on it's own. What do you think about trying to understand the bible in the context of the time it was written and the people it was written for?. But homosexuality is repeated as an offense to God about a dozen times in the Bible. That is, in fact, the very definition of using context correctly. Anyone who says it is only found in Leviticus is blind or retarded. I mean, Sodom was nuked because of their homosexual practices. I don't know how God could make it any more clear than that. Revelation doesn't stand on its own, either. Again, this is how one is supposed to use context. Almost every book in the Bible corroborates one section of Revelation or another. The Bible was written for everyone in every time. So that question is moot.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 15, 2018 0:00:46 GMT
But then people say things like when homosexuality is mentioned in leviticus it is in the context of pagan rituals and not applicable out side of that, or the whole thing about revelation, meaning there is not real biblical context for revelation, it stands on it's own. What do you think about trying to understand the bible in the context of the time it was written and the people it was written for?. But homosexuality is repeated as an offense to God about a dozen times in the Bible. That is, in fact, the very definition of using context correctly. Anyone who says it is only found in Leviticus is blind or retarded. I mean, Sodom was nuked because of their homosexual practices. I don't know how God could make it any more clear than that. Revelation doesn't stand on its own, either. Again, this is how one is supposed to use context. Almost every book in the Bible corroborates one section of Revelation or another. The Bible was written for everyone in every time. So that question is moot. But this is what makes it so hard, contextually you can argue that sodom was destroyed for the sin of lack of hospitality. So the laws of leviticus apply to modern Christians?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2018 0:16:17 GMT
You can evade that surveillance by not carrying the device You can remove a microchip. It's just a sub-dermal implant. This is sort of a pointless conversation, given that the OP is hoping for an irremovable devil device planted deep in the brain tissue, monitoring his most secret thoughts, finally bringing about the fractured sci-fi dystopia human slavery epidemic he's been hoping for since Jade Helm fell through and all those empty Walmarts just ended up being empty Walmarts. I know they can be removed in practice, but if the usage of these becomes widespread, you would probably be severely disadvantaged by having it removed, as the excerpt from the TED video discussed. I don't know whether Erjen's specific fears for this are well founded or wildly paranoid; but it would be naive not to be concerned at all about microchipping.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2018 0:18:04 GMT
If the government can obtain the data and can process the data (with powerful computers), then it is going to use the data if it perceives a use for it. Two big assumptions. I doubt they'd get anything they wouldn't be able to access anyway. And that's what organisations like the NSA are supposed to be doing, anyway. Spying! It's what they're for. So your concern is that you wouldn't be able to break the law? Sounds good to me. They'd be able to access biological data and be able to keep us under constant surveillance. And you think that suicide should be illegal (it isn't, by the way - at least not de jure) and that the government should be able to electronically monitor individuals to ensure that it's never possible for anyone to commit suicide?
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 15, 2018 7:48:45 GMT
But then people say things like when homosexuality is mentioned in leviticus it is in the context of pagan rituals and not applicable out side of that, or the whole thing about revelation, meaning there is not real biblical context for revelation, it stands on it's own. What do you think about trying to understand the bible in the context of the time it was written and the people it was written for?. But homosexuality is repeated as an offense to God about a dozen times in the Bible. That is, in fact, the very definition of using context correctly. Anyone who says it is only found in Leviticus is blind or retarded. I mean, Sodom was nuked because of their homosexual practices. I don't know how God could make it any more clear than that. Revelation doesn't stand on its own, either. Again, this is how one is supposed to use context. Almost every book in the Bible corroborates one section of Revelation or another. The Bible was written for everyone in every time. So that question is moot. With respect (mostly) Context is in the eye of the beholder and is a result of differences in translations, interpretations and personal agenda when reading the Bible.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Feb 15, 2018 8:48:40 GMT
Sure. Nobody around here ever demonstrated a gigantic victim complex, did they? Nobody round here has a list of things coming for us all that includes magic planets, aeroplane contrails, rich people, WalMart, the UN, FEMA... Nope. Nobody that stupid around here. You're the only one here talking about "the end of the world." I've gone on record saying the world isn't going to end for a good long time. I've personally guaranteed it, which is something that you conveniently forget, and then you trot it out again. You bastards did the same thing regarding the stellar and planetary alignment of last year. My hope is that people will listen to what is really being said, and not to what you said was said.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Feb 15, 2018 8:50:01 GMT
Valid points, except, as you've said, that's "as they stand," now and, in a dystopian society (which is our context), you would not be able to remove them in an out-patient process because that would be illegal. Then take heart - when women couldn't legally get abortions, they still got abortions. Sci-fi dystopian systems of oppression come hand in hand with the resistance! That's a silly analogy.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Feb 15, 2018 8:58:47 GMT
But then people say things like when homosexuality is mentioned in leviticus it is in the context of pagan rituals and not applicable out side of that, or the whole thing about revelation, meaning there is not real biblical context for revelation, it stands on it's own. What do you think about trying to understand the bible in the context of the time it was written and the people it was written for?. But homosexuality is repeated as an offense to God about a dozen times in the Bible. That is, in fact, the very definition of using context correctly. Anyone who says it is only found in Leviticus is blind or retarded. I mean, Sodom was nuked because of their homosexual practices. I don't know how God could make it any more clear than that. Revelation doesn't stand on its own, either. Again, this is how one is supposed to use context. Almost every book in the Bible corroborates one section of Revelation or another. The Bible was written for everyone in every time. So that question is moot. wintersuicide, do you see how gadreel is? You can make it so simple for him that even the banjo boy from "Deliverance" would understand it, and yet he continues to impress himself with his clever sophistry. The way this thread is going, you can expect to hear about the prohibition against eating shellfish and mixing fabrics in Leviticus. I've seen it too many times.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Feb 15, 2018 9:05:20 GMT
You can remove a microchip. It's just a sub-dermal implant. This is sort of a pointless conversation, given that the OP is hoping for an irremovable devil device planted deep in the brain tissue, monitoring his most secret thoughts, finally bringing about the fractured sci-fi dystopia human slavery epidemic he's been hoping for since Jade Helm fell through and all those empty Walmarts just ended up being empty Walmarts. I know they can be removed in practice, but if the usage of these becomes widespread, you would probably be severely disadvantaged by having it removed, as the excerpt from the TED video discussed. I don't know whether Erjen's specific fears for this are well founded or wildly paranoid; but it would be naive not to be concerned at all about microchipping. Some are saying it can be programmed to change your DNA so that you won't be human anymore, turn you into just another byte recorded in the main frame; a slave without any will of your own. I don't know enough about the technology to be able to comment on these predictions, but neither do I rule them out. For the moment I'm more concerned about the effects of a "cashless" society on people who refuse to participate in it for religious and/or philosophical reasons.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2018 11:21:39 GMT
Sure. Nobody around here ever demonstrated a gigantic victim complex, did they? Nobody round here has a list of things coming for us all that includes magic planets, aeroplane contrails, rich people, WalMart, the UN, FEMA... Nope. Nobody that stupid around here. You're the only one here talking about "the end of the world." No I'm not.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2018 15:30:50 GMT
But this is what makes it so hard, contextually you can argue that sodom was destroyed for the sin of lack of hospitality. No, the argument that Sodom was destroyed for the sin of lack of hospitality doesn't even hold water under the scrutiny of Ezekiel's passage by itself, let alone what the rest of scripture says on the topic. Nope. They didn't even apply to Peter, so why would they apply to Christians 2,000 years later?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2018 15:35:40 GMT
But homosexuality is repeated as an offense to God about a dozen times in the Bible. That is, in fact, the very definition of using context correctly. Anyone who says it is only found in Leviticus is blind or retarded. I mean, Sodom was nuked because of their homosexual practices. I don't know how God could make it any more clear than that. Revelation doesn't stand on its own, either. Again, this is how one is supposed to use context. Almost every book in the Bible corroborates one section of Revelation or another. The Bible was written for everyone in every time. So that question is moot. With respect (mostly) Context is in the eye of the beholder and is a result of differences in translations, interpretations and personal agenda when reading the Bible. While it's true that I don't read Greek or Hebrew, I only read the KJV, which, in congruence with the logistic capability of the British Empire, leads me to believe it was the version the world was meant to read. My interpretations are sound because I have no personal agenda. I was and remain a completely empty and open vessel when it comes to the scriptures. You are right, though. Many people do allow their personal agendas to influence their interpretation, which is how you end up with garbage readings like Sodom was punished for not being hospitable.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2018 15:44:55 GMT
But homosexuality is repeated as an offense to God about a dozen times in the Bible. That is, in fact, the very definition of using context correctly. Anyone who says it is only found in Leviticus is blind or retarded. I mean, Sodom was nuked because of their homosexual practices. I don't know how God could make it any more clear than that. Revelation doesn't stand on its own, either. Again, this is how one is supposed to use context. Almost every book in the Bible corroborates one section of Revelation or another. The Bible was written for everyone in every time. So that question is moot. wintersuicide, do you see how gadreel is? You can make it so simple for him that even the banjo boy from "Deliverance" would understand it, and yet he continues to impress himself with his clever sophistry. The way this thread is going, you can expect to hear about the prohibition against eating shellfish and mixing fabrics in Leviticus. I've seen it too many times. It's all good. Unlike some Christians, I don't give any pause to some of the controversial moments in the Bible, nor do I care if non-believers can't comprehend that the text announces that it's going to evolve and then evolves. I find that Christian and non-Christian alike have spent far too much time in the Pentateuch, Psalms, Proverbs, Major Prophets, the Gospels and the Epistles and not nearly enough time studying the Minor Prophets. This leads to much confusion. I don't know how anybody expects to cross the river without walking the bridge.
|
|