SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Face masks can't go on forever. What we need is a vaccine to get this under control.
But then how do you know whether someone you're interacting with (and no face mask) has been vaccinated? Simple! Have an obvious mark on the right hand or forehead proving the person is safe. You can be sure of who they are. That they were vaccinated. And that they don't have any wrongthink.
Seeing anyone without the mark would be a huge indicator to distance yourself from them. Report them to authorities. Certainly not to do business with them. [Rev 13:16-18]
Fear will drive people to take the mark and report those who don't have it. And it will seem to be the wise thing to do. Even if it is actually a fatal mistake. [Rev 14:9-11] Thanks to the dear leader who made it all happen to keep us safe. Think of the children! Etc.
Such a mandatory vaccine, required for every person on Earth, would definitely not have any undesirable side effects. [Rev 16:2]
Disclaimer: I have not started any "Don't take the mark" messages prior to this journal entry. And certainly would not do so anonymously. The preceding is merely an opinion about how things might go. But I'll just say this:
Don't take the mark! It will cost you to refuse. It won't be easy to refuse.
More, if you find yourself in this situation and are reading this.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 13 2020, @01:54AM (14 children)
The preterist view is that Revelation refers to events around 70 AD. There's just one problem. Revelation was probably written around 95 AD, so roughly 25 years after the events it supposedly foretells. If it's based on the idea that Nero would return after his death, linking the events in Revelation to the siege of Jerusalem doesn't make sense.
Some scientists have examined the book of Ezekiel and believe he was an epileptic who interpreted his seizures as visions from God. The imagery in Revelation is fairly similar. You would have done better to suggest that people who didn't understand anything about how the brain works misinterpreted the images during seizures. That would be more logical than your preterist argument.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday May 13 2020, @02:27AM (13 children)
I know when Revelation was written, thanks :) I'm not a Christian (or Jew, or Muslim, or Abrahamic death cultist of any stripe).
You're actually hitting him a lot harder than I would have, though I suspect you know it goes without saying that he won't accept any naturalistic explanation like seizures. My maternal grandmother was a serious temporal-lobe epileptic and more Catholic than the Pope as a result. She even went to Lourdes for a cancer cure, which to no one's surprise but her own completely failed to work.
Danny is a cultist. He's beyond rescue or rehabilitation in this life, by his own hand and by his own choice.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 3, Touché) by khallow on Wednesday May 13 2020, @06:58AM (5 children)
You're a modern R. Quincy M.E., Azuma, able to tell by glancing at their sarcastic posts under a microscope how someone's brain has died. "DannyB made a joke about covid and the Beast. Put cause of death as 'cultist', Sam. He's beyond rescue or rehabilitation in this life."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 13 2020, @08:07AM (4 children)
But. But..People are *dying*. Doesn't anyone care?!?
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 13 2020, @10:58AM (3 children)
Of course khallow cares, he's not a monster! There's money to be made! What's the lastest on
chloroxymoroquinineRemovesmyears?(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday May 13 2020, @03:43PM (2 children)
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday May 14 2020, @12:48AM (1 child)
Close those open ports, then.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday May 14 2020, @01:01AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 13 2020, @09:13AM (4 children)
The irony of that statement is just too much having seen you prattle on about your own superstitious/spiritualistic/psychic nonsense at length.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday May 14 2020, @12:46AM (3 children)
The thing is, though, that *is* a naturalistic explanation to me :) Let me explain: I hold that the dichotomy between "natural" and "supernatural" is partly or even wholly false. What could possibly be more natural than God? *Actual* God, a truly universal, all-pervasive ground of all being, not Yahweh or Brahman or whatever else; think more like the Buddhist idea of "the Absolute." Non-personal, non-egoic, etc.
Briefly, I suspect the mind/matter dichotomy is in a similar position (because, frankly, I think it's the same thing by another name). No one seems to have hit on the idea that there could be something ontologically prior or primitive to both, that what we think of as "mind" and what we think of as "matter" are the same thing--and that both are more like verbs than nouns. So I agree with even the hardest materialist/atheist that there is no such thing as a mind without some sort of substrate, and go even further and agree that "mind" emerges from something else.
Think of it all as just different wave modes on the surface of the Absolute/God/Existence/whatever you wish to call it.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 14 2020, @04:18AM
Q.E.D.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 14 2020, @06:23PM (1 child)
Unless you can scientifically prove your assertions you shouldn't go around talking about them as facts. Your views on spirituality most closely resemble my own, but until I have real proof I have to keep that clause in my head that it could all be bullshit, we might all just be temporary structures of atoms with nothing more than emergent properties of consciousness that disappear.
If you personally have enough proof that is fine, but don't fool yourself about how your speeches come off to others.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday May 15 2020, @01:10PM
I have mentioned before that I could easily be wrong, that the hardcore atheists might be entirely right, and that through some unknown process I've become mired in delusion on this subject. I do believe I've had more than enough firsthand proof, but anecdotes aren't data and I don't blame others for not believing it; they weren't there.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Arik on Wednesday May 13 2020, @09:58AM (1 child)
That's quite a feat, considering that people who have devoted their life to that study admit they /don't/ know. And considering there simply is no evidence available to settle the question with complete certainty.
The date ~95 is often considered probable, based on reasonable but far from certain assumptions. Like much of the "new testament" the earliest manuscripts are /much/ later however. It could have been written even earlier, it could also have been done much later, ~250 perhaps, shortly before the earliest manuscript evidence. A range of answers are /possible/ - scholarship argues over which is more probable, in light of what little evidence can be adduced.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday May 14 2020, @12:41AM
Call me naive, but I tend to give "the other side" the benefit of the doubt in pretty much any argument when there isn't enough evidence to conclude otherwise reasonably. *Could* Revelation be later than ~90-95 AD? Sure. But I don't see a problem with going with that date, in light of what we do know.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...