Disappearing Act ? For the Rapture Lovers

But dont you think when the whole world sees every christian disapearing all over they would instantly convert. Its a wierd wasy to go for a religion based entirely on faith. Something the physical after 2000 years of no definate proof and only faith.

Then take into account the entire book is symbolism as violent and vague as they come. Anything can mean anything....the only thing we have to go by are some scolars trying to make you see the way they see it.

0 Replies

EpiNirvana wrote:

But dont you think when the whole world sees every christian disapearing all over they would instantly convert. Its a wierd wasy to go for a religion based entirely on faith. Something the physical after 2000 years of no definate proof and only faith..

Exactly, but that takes to much common sense to see. If we were walking down the street and people started instantly disappearing then if we were not Christian we would instantly become one.

EpiNirvana wrote:

Then take into account the entire book is symbolism as violent and vague as they come. Anything can mean anything....the only thing we have to go by are some scolars trying to make you see the way they see it.

That's the whole purpose of the book. It tests the heart and mind. It is written to allow One to see whatever their heart desires. If you desire to escape reality by floating on a cloud, it will allow you to see that within the verses. >Representations

0 Replies

EpiNirvana wrote:

But dont you think when the whole world sees every christian disapearing all over they would instantly convert.

Not every view of the rapture affords that opportunity.

EpiNirvana wrote:

Then take into account the entire book is symbolism as violent and vague as they come. Anything can mean anything....the only thing we have to go by are some scolars trying to make you see the way they see it.

If the 'entire book' you are referring to is the book of Revelation, that is not the book which is most often referred to when discussing the rapture.

However, the symbols in Revelation are not as 'vague' as you might think. Nearly all of them are directly drawn from the Old Testament, and their meaning is much different from your 'anything can mean anything' depiction.

If you know the Old Testament well, the book of Revelation is not that difficult to follow. But if you don't , it is a riot of symbolism , almost totally incomprehensible.

0 Replies

Some say the book was written on Patmos under the influence of "magic mushrooms" which are prolific arround the site.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060905202449AAGzOeo

(Apologies if this has already been discussed)

0 Replies

fresco wrote:

Some say the book was written on Patmos under the influence of "magic mushrooms" which are prolific arround the site.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060905202449AAGzOeo

(Apologies if this has already been discussed)

Your source ( I use the term loosely ) offers no evidence that they are ( or were at the time of John's writing) known in that location. And if known, no evidence that they were used by John.

0 Replies

real life,

The point is academic to me (an atheist), but it seems "rapture-like visions" have been well researched by the "mushroom guys".

http://www.egodeath.com/amanita.htm

0 Replies

Again this 'source' offers no proof that John knew of or that he used any such thing.

The only reference in the entire article to the book of Revelation is a quotation of Rev 10:2 where John , in his vision, was given a tiny scroll to eat which tasted sweet but turned out to be bitter for the stomach (his inner being).

The author makes no attempt to connect this with the idea of mushrooms at all.

He simply surrounds the quotation with dozens of pictures of mushrooms and then throws the quotation on the table , as if to say 'see? John is EATING something! oooooooooooo.........get it? He's EATING something!...........get it? (nudge, nudge, wink, wink)'

The author makes NO argument whatever that John used mushrooms, unless he expects us to read his mind and thus know what he 'knows'.

I have little doubt that the author may have used mushrooms, but I am not convinced that John knew of or used them.

If this point is 'academic' to you, then I would expect you would require some type of argumentation, evidence or support of the idea before you toss it around as if it had any plausibility.

0 Replies

Irrespective of your dismissal of the source, the point has more credibility than "divine revelation". This is the central issue which "believers" miss. They try to argue for "scientific method" when their own axioms break all the rules of evidence. Scientific method is simply not an option for "believers".

0 Replies

If you are going to argue that the view you presented is 'scientific' and mine is not, shouldn't you at least pretend to present some evidence?

0 Replies

No ! I am not making the claim for a drug induced source, I am merely commenting that whatever evidence others may have for this hypothesis it is certainly a "reasonable" one, whereas "divine revelation" is (a) not even a hypothesis and (b) precludes investigation of viable ones.

0 Replies

fresco wrote:

No ! I am not making the claim for a drug induced source, I am merely commenting that whatever evidence others may have for this hypothesis it is certainly a "reasonable" one, whereas "divine revelation" is (a) not even a hypothesis and (b) precludes investigation of viable ones.

They (the sources you presented) presented no evidence at all.

Did you not notice that before you posted them?

0 Replies

real life,

Of course there is evidence ! Hallucinogens produce "rapturesque experiences" or "revelationary visions". Whether they actually did so in this particular case may not be testable after the fact, but Occam's razor applies in such cases unless counter evidence is provided.

0 Replies

fresco wrote:

real life,

Of course there is evidence ! Hallucinogens produce "rapturesque experiences" or "revelationary visions". Whether they actually did so in this particular case may not be testable after the fact, but Occam's razor applies in such cases unless counter evidence is provided.

What evidence can you cite that "magic mushrooms" existed where John was at the time that he was there? (So far, you and your sources have cited none.)

What evidence can you cite that John knew about and/or used these? (So far, you and your sources have cited none.)

0 Replies

real life,

You don't get it. !

The onus is on you to refute the circumstantial evidence which supports a natural explanation of events. You are the one pushing the supernatural. This is a typical case of theists misunderstanding the nature of scientific method. There are NO "proofs" in science, only tenable explanations with replicable observations which stand unless contradicted.

I have no vested interest in the "mushroom theory" per se any more than I have on "gematraic analysis" (e.g. 666= NERO). They are both plausible whereas "divine inspiration" is not. My interests lie in pointing out that the selective elevation of any ancient text to "holy writ" constitutes a socially pathological prostitution of the intellect which has repercussions beyond the believer himself.

0 Replies

so were "magic mushrooms" prevelant around 530 bc when daniel wrote his book that also prophecies many of the things john talks about???lol

0 Replies

fresco wrote:

real life,

You don't get it. !

The onus is on you to refute the circumstantial evidence which supports a natural explanation of events. You are the one pushing the supernatural. This is a typical case of theists misunderstanding the nature of scientific method. There are NO "proofs" in science, only tenable explanations with replicable observations which stand unless contradicted.

I have no vested interest in the "mushroom theory" per se any more than I have on "gematraic analysis" (e.g. 666= NERO). They are both plausible whereas "divine inspiration" is not. My interests lie in pointing out that the selective elevation of any ancient text to "holy writ" constitutes a socially pathological prostitution of the intellect which has repercussions beyond the believer himself.

hi fresco,

You haven't even provided circumstantial evidence of the idea ( I can't even call it a hypothesis, it doesn't qualify ) you presented.

If you take the idea seriously, then present some evidence. If not, perhaps you're just here for comic relief.

You put forth the idea that 'some say' the apostle John was partaking of "magic mushrooms" when he wrote the Revelation.

You have provided no evidence that these existed at the place and time that John lived. Nor did the links you posted provide any evidence at all.

You have provided no evidence that (even if they did exist) that John knew about them and/or used them. Nor did the links you posted provide any evidence at all.

The symbolism of the Revelation is not the product of hallucinogenics.

Have you ever read the Revelation in it's entirety? Or only bits and pieces?

The many symbols in Revelation are nearly all drawn from the Old Testament. Therefore to even begin to understand the Revelation, you need to be quite conversant with the Old Testament.

Have you ever read the Old Testament in it's entirety? Or only bits and pieces?

Can you corrolate the symbols in the Revelation with their Old Testament counterparts?

You claim to be using the 'scientific method' but you have woefully misrepresented science if you think that throwing an assertion without evidence into the mix qualifies as 'science'.

0 Replies

What do you think inspired the writing of the Revelation, real life?

0 Replies

echi wrote:

What do you think inspired the writing of the Revelation, real life?

If you read the first few verses you will find that John was certain it was provided by God through Jesus Christ. A careful reading will reveal many threads originating in the OT, particularly, but not limited to, the book of Daniel. If John had been chewin the shrooms, he sure managed to make some timely connections. I go for John's explanation.

0 Replies

real life,

As a former published scientist I know a fair amount about "the scientific method". I repeat....THE ONUS IS ON YOU......YOU need to show there were no mushrooms on Patmos at the time or that John didn't indulge in them.....NOT ME!

Now you are even suggesting I should take in interest in the ragbag of the OT with its scientifically discredited creation myths !........really! Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

echi wrote:
What do you think inspired the writing of the Revelation, real life?
If you read the first few verses you will find that John was certain it was provided by God through Jesus Christ. A careful reading will reveal many threads originating in the OT, particularly, but not limited to, the book of Daniel. If John had been chewin the shrooms, he sure managed to make some timely connections. I go for John's explanation.

Why would you take the words attributed to "John" to mean something unexplainable over something explainable and, at least, as plausible?

0 Replies

Disappearing Act ? For the Rapture Lovers

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know