[fluoridation]

The book of Revelation also cites various signs that are metaphorical enough to be applied to just about anything.

It's pointless to cite the Bible to defend a theological position, because someone else can cite a different part that can be interpreted to say the exact opposite.

[fred_wilson]

> The book of Revelation also cites various signs that are metaphorical enough to be applied to just about anything.

If someone plans to, they should first read Revelation 22:18–19.

And Revelations isn’t the only prophetic work. Try Ezekiel.

> It's pointless to cite the Bible to defend a theological position

Understandable, but citing the Bible is fairly important in theology, though it should be done within context.

Sure, Judaism was word of mouth a long time, and that’s great. I personally can’t remember much, so I think referencing text is fine.

[fluoridation]

>If someone plans to, they should first read Revelation 22:18–19.

See, that's when you use literal reading. "I'm not adding anything to the text, I'm just interpreting it."

>And Revelations isn’t the only prophetic work. Try Ezekiel.

Ezekiel is clearly about events in our past, though.

>Understandable, but citing the Bible is fairly important in theology, though it should be done within context.

Meh. There's no internally consistent Christian theology that cites the Bible and doesn't involve generous amounts of cherry picking.

[stogot]

Its systematic theology is internally consistent; amazingly consistent given three thousand years across 66 books and dozens of authors. It’s the cherry picking and overemphas that gets one into trouble

[fluoridation]

>Its systematic theology is internally consistent

It's not. Christian dogma doesn't even obey the law of identity.

[stogot]

are you talking about the trinity?

[fluoridation]

I'm talking about the divinity of Jesus.

[eru]

That's why the Catholics have a guy in charge who infallibly tells you how to interpret the damn thing. Instead of having every Tom, Dick and Harry have a stab at misunderstanding scripture.

[akerl_]

It's a good thing there's always exactly one pope.

[gnabgib]

Well that's provably false.. there've been three popes[0] and zero popes happen now and then (2025[1], 2013[2], 2005, 1978..)

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Schism

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Leo_XIV

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Francis

[48terry]

That was the joke.

[akerl_]

Thanks <3

[o11c]

Okay, where's the "falsehoods programmers believe about ..." article for popes?

[fluoridation]

Not that that stops individual Catholics from having their own opinions anyway. It's fractal cherry picking.

[krapp]

I wish Christians would realize the Book of Revelations is about the past (probably about Nero Caesar and Roman persecution of Christians) and not the future and stop embarrassing themselves.

Stop trying to figure out which scary new technology is the Number of the Beast. Stop trying to figure out which scary new politician is the Antichrist. Stop trying to figure out what any of that shit means, it doesn't mean anything anymore and the only apocalypse that's going to happen is the one we ourselves create, in part because we persist in our delusion that we don't really have to worry about this world because God's going to burn it all down anyway.