Failed prophecy.

[ruby sparks]

There's a prediction doing the rounds on Facebook that the world will end on April 23.

This serves the very useful purpose of identifying the people who don't look past the headlines (almost everyone on FB); If you click on the accompanying article, it was written on 12 April, 2018, and so the prophecy is that the world will end this time LAST year.

Which renders it less than convincing in my book.

ETA a bit of Googling suggests that April 23 is a very popular date for Doomsday predictions; The first of which was 23rd April 1843.

https://www.livescience.com/62293-bogus-doomsday-april-23.html

I suggest we ask poli about this one. He'll say stuff. Without denying that it was a failed prophecy.

First question: was it originally written in Koine Greek? This is important. Apparently. It could have been a failed prophecy but at least was written in Koine Greek. These things matter. Poli will explain why.

 

[skepticalbip]

Maybe those prophets were right and the world did end but no one noticed.

Nah, I just looked out the window - It's still there.

Thank goodness. I was too fucking lazy to get up and look.

 

[Politesse]

There's a prediction doing the rounds on Facebook that the world will end on April 23.

This serves the very useful purpose of identifying the people who don't look past the headlines (almost everyone on FB); If you click on the accompanying article, it was written on 12 April, 2018, and so the prophecy is that the world will end this time LAST year.

Which renders it less than convincing in my book.

ETA a bit of Googling suggests that April 23 is a very popular date for Doomsday predictions; The first of which was 23rd April 1843.

https://www.livescience.com/62293-bogus-doomsday-april-23.html

I suggest we ask poli about this one. He'll say stuff. Without denying that it was a failed prophecy.

First question: was it originally written in Koine Greek? This is important. Apparently. It could have been a failed prophecy but at least was written in Koine Greek. These things matter. Poli will explain why.

It's generally more interesting when you really study things and learn what you can from them, yes.

 

[DBT]

First rule of faith: If a bible verse is written in Greek it is sure to mean the very opposite of what it says or means whenever translated into English, if the original meaning is at odds with dogma.

 

[Learner]

Ah ok but I would think, they would KNOW that it is supposed to happen as ONLY as according to the sequence of prophesied events in revelation.

You are completely missing the obvious point. Why is Paul reassuring them that it will happen in their lifetime?

The book of Revelation wasn't even written yet, by the way. I mean seriously. It's ridiculous that I, an atheist, even have to tell you this stuff.

I think we are perhaps mixing or combining in the discussion different prophesied events here , so let me just examine a little, the previous posts (I rushed it a little ,the last time I was here).

 

[ruby sparks]

It's generally more interesting when you really study things and learn what you can from them, yes.

Sure, but, it is sort of avoiding the central issue here.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Maybe those prophets were right and the world did end but no one noticed.

Nah, I just looked out the window - It's still there.

Yes, but it SPIRITUALLY died...

 

[Politesse]

It's generally more interesting when you really study things and learn what you can from them, yes.

Sure, but, it is sort of avoiding the central issue here.

Sorry. I mean, you're trying to calling me out I guess, but I'm not embarrassed by my attitude toward free intellectual inquiry, or preferring it to emotionally driven dogpiles.

 

[Politesse]

First rule of faith: If a bible verse is written in Greek it is sure to mean the very opposite of what it says or means whenever translated into English, if the original meaning is at odds with dogma.

Is that meant as a jab at me? When have I ever defended dogma by contesting a translation?

 

[DBT]

First rule of faith: If a bible verse is written in Greek it is sure to mean the very opposite of what it says or means whenever translated into English, if the original meaning is at odds with dogma.

Is that meant as a jab at me? When have I ever defended dogma by contesting a translation?

No, it wasn't aimed at anyone. Just a general comment on what I've seen happen in these debates.

 

[ruby sparks]

Sorry. I mean, you're trying to calling me out I guess, but I'm not embarrassed by my attitude toward free intellectual inquiry avoiding the central issue, or preferring it to emotionally driven dogpiles grasping the nettle.

FIFY.

 

[Politesse]

Sorry. I mean, you're trying to calling me out I guess, but I'm not embarrassed by my attitude toward free intellectual inquiry avoiding the central issue, or preferring it to emotionally driven dogpiles grasping the nettle.

FIFY.

What central issue?

 

[ruby sparks]

Sorry. I mean, you're trying to calling me out I guess, but I'm not embarrassed by my attitude toward free intellectual inquiry avoiding the central issue, or preferring it to emotionally driven dogpiles grasping the nettle.

FIFY.

What central issue?

For starters, that the prophecy failed.

 

[Politesse]

What central issue?

For starters, that the prophecy failed.

Well, yeah.

 

[ruby sparks]

What central issue?

For starters, that the prophecy failed.

Well, yeah.

Exactly. That is so you.

As if, well, it doesn't really matter much. Was not significant. Can be set aside in the larger scheme of things. Business as usual.

 

[Politesse]

Well, yeah.

Exactly. That is so you.

As if, well, it doesn't really matter much. Was not significant. Can be set aside in the larger scheme of things. Business as usual.

I didn't say it wasn't important. You were mocking the idea of learning anything more about it. Say, asking the obvious question of what the verse everyone is quoting actually said. I disagree, it's always good to explore potential language issues when supposedly discussing something you know is in translation. That's an invitation to more conversation, not less.

 

[DBT]

The prophesy appears to have failed, nothing happened as described within the given timeframe, or anytime since....so what are the implications of that failure for theists?

 

[Politesse]

The prophesy appears to have failed, nothing happened as described within the given timeframe, or anytime since....so what are the implications of that failure for theists?

They had to do what all followers of a Millenialist prophet do after the end: adapt and find a way to reframe it. I happen to have the acquaintance of some people who went through this very experience a few years ago, when Family Radio predicted the end a bit early and had to dodge... twice.


I note that the timeframe in which this conversation must have been had is the very century we know least about. There are almost no documents hailing from the generation immediately following Jesus' death. Just Paul's letters, the genuine ones that is, and contested mentions in the works of Josephus, Clement and others. Some material evidence, like Christian graffiti on walls. And maybe, depending on who you ask, the gospels themselves, including the one we are discussing here. It is interesting to note that the person who set this book into print almost certainly knew that Jesus wasn't coming back while the apostles yet lived. Even by a conservative estimate, they would have been getting old, and in all likelihood had passed entirely by the time the Gospels reached their final drafts.

 

[ruby sparks]

I didn't say it wasn't important. You were mocking the idea of learning anything more about it. Say, asking the obvious question of what the verse everyone is quoting actually said. I disagree, it's always good to explore potential language issues when supposedly discussing something you know is in translation. That's an invitation to more conversation, not less.

Yeah, but it's an invitation to have a conversation that sidesteps the central issue, that's what it is. What more is there to learn, that matters, that isn't just fluff? What's up next? How many angels can dance on a pin? Seriously. Where's the import? It's already there in the failure of the prophecy, that's where it is.

It was a dud, a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing (to quote Shakespeare, and a possibility considered by E. P. Sanders). Unless you're merely a Humanist or something. But the supernatural didn't show up.

 

[Politesse]

I didn't say it wasn't important. You were mocking the idea of learning anything more about it. Say, asking the obvious question of what the verse everyone is quoting actually said. I disagree, it's always good to explore potential language issues when supposedly discussing something you know is in translation. That's an invitation to more conversation, not less.

Yeah, but it's an invitation to have a conversation that sidesteps the central issue, that's what it is. What more is there to learn, that matters, that isn't just fluff? What's up next? How many angels can dance on a pin? Seriously. Where's the import? It's already there in the failure of the prophecy, that's where it is.

It was a dud, a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing (to quote Shakespeare, and a possibility considered by E. P. Sanders).

Glorified ignorance isn't suiting. You don't know "what more there is to learn" until you make the attempt to learn it.

I note that you are badly misinterpreting Shakespeare as well. Macbeth is not the hero of Macbeth, but rather his own worst enemy save perhaps his Lady Wife, whose death occassioned the existential outburst you quote. Macbeth concluded that life had no meaning for anyone, but what makes his life tragic is that it was his own actions that so hollowed out his sense of meaning and purpose. Like many strongmen, he only turned cynical when the costs of his actions caught up with him.