Prophesy

Discussion in 'Religion' started by Jason.Marshall, Dec 18, 2014.

  1. Jason.Marshall Banned Banned

    Messages:
    654
    Mathematicians, a task for you here please construct using measurements described in the text below
    "kingdom of heaven"

    "For the day shall cometh when it shall be built"

    It is important to distinguish between "the camp of the saints, and the beloved city" spoken of in Revelation ch.20:9, and the New Jerusalem of chapter 21. Rev.ch.20:9 refers to an earthly City, description and purpose of which is found in book of Ezekiel, starting with chapter 36 and ending with ch.48. One of the most obvious differences is, the dimensions of the New Jerusalem of Rev.ch.21 are 1000 times bigger than dimensions of the city in Ezekiel ch.48 (and in Rev.ch.20:9) New Jerusalem of Revelation ch.21 is 2225 km. in length, width, and height, a city of these gigantic proportions can not be located on this earth, but as stated in ch.21 comes down from heaven on to the new earth.
    "source wiki"
    According to John, the New Jerusalem is "pure gold, like clear glass" and its "brilliance [is] like a very costly stone, as a stone of crystal-clear jasper." The street of the city is also made of "pure gold, like transparent glass". The base of the city is laid out in a square and surrounded by a wall made of jasper. It says in Revelation 21:16 that the height, length, and width are of equal dimensions - as were the Holy of Holies in the Tabernacle and First Temple - and they measure 12,000 furlongs which is approximately 1500.3 miles). John writes that the wall is 144 cubits, which is assumed to be the width since the length is mentioned previously. 144 cubits are about equal to 65 meters, or 72 yards. It is important to note that 12 is the square root of 144. The number 12 was very important to early Jews and Christians, representing the 12 tribes of Israel and 12 Apostles of Jesus Christ. The four sides of the city represented the four cardinal directions (North, South, East, and West.) In this way, New Jerusalem was thought of as an inclusive place, with gates accepting all of the 12 tribes of Israel from all corners of the earth.
    There is no temple building in the New Jerusalem. God and the Lamb are the city's temple, since they are worshiped everywhere. Revelation 22 goes on to describe a river of the water of life that flows down the middle of the great street of the city from the Throne of God. The tree of life grows in the middle of this street and on either side, or in the middle of the street and on either side of the river. The tree bears twelve fruits, or kinds of fruits, and yields its fruit every month. According to John, "The leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations." This inclusion of the tree of life in the New Jerusalem harkens back to the Garden of Eden. The fruit the tree bears may be the fruit of life.
    John states that the New Jerusalem will be free of sin. The servants of God will have theosis, and "His name will be on their foreheads." Night will no longer fall, and the inhabitants of the city will "have need no lamp nor light of the sun, for the Lord God gives them light." John ends his account of the New Jerusalem by stressing its eternal nature: "And they shall reign forever and ever."
    Gates[edit]
    There are twelve gates in the wall oriented to the compass with three each on the east, north, south, and west sides. There is an angel at each gate, or gatehouse. These gates are each made of a single pearl, giving them the name of the "pearly gates". The names of the twelve tribes of Israel are written on these gates.
    The new Jerusalem gates may bear some relation to the gates mentioned in Enoch, Chapters 33 - 35, where the prophet reports (at the extremities of the whole earth) "heavenly gates opening into heaven; three of them distinctly separated." [33, 3.] And so on for each of the four major compass directions.[ref. Laurence translation, Book of Enoch.]
    "source wiki"
     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2014
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. OnlyMe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,914
    This does not belong in physics and math.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,051
    Cesspool in 3...2....1....
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Jason.Marshall Banned Banned

    Messages:
    654
    I pose a mathematical task for the enlightened minds on sciforums althought the contents of math are disguised in religious text does not mean it does not involved math. I seek a clearer understanding of these measurements of this, "kingdom of heaven" they speak of in this religious text and I aspire to comprehend its mathematical significance however vague and obscure they may be hidden inbetween the words. If this has anything to do with the Egyptians I assure you it has to do with math.
     
  8. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,846

    No, you are nothing more then a fraud.
     
  9. Jason.Marshall Banned Banned

    Messages:
    654
    Explain? In all honesty and sincerity I do not want to dishonour the one most high that is most important so perhaps you may reveal some of my failings and in the process you will help save my soul for I am in great pain and confusion

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2014
  10. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    This definitely belongs in the religion forum, along with every other thread the op has started.
     
  11. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,846

    You are starting a religious subject under the guise of science and maths.
    You know it, I know it, and the forum knows it.
    Yes, you are a fraud.
     
  12. Jason.Marshall Banned Banned

    Messages:
    654
    No...please attempt the task.
     
  13. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    This is more religion than math, and as such has been moved to the appropriate subforum
     
  14. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,944
    This is Math and Physics not Numerology and Religion.

    The cesspool is calling....
     
  15. Jason.Marshall Banned Banned

    Messages:
    654
    The lack of imagination is a dangerous romance...I was really hoping for the added brain power of sciforums but no one else sees the value so I will end the discussion here.
     
  16. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,693
    Good idea.

    You will find that, for very sound philosophical reasons, any attempt to introduce religion into science gets short shrift here. And that, for equally sound reasons, any attempt to interpret the bible literally will similarly be given short shrift.
     
  17. Landau Roof Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    598
    That's a 'larf'! Short shrift out of arrogance and thinking you are smarter than anyone else! 88% of the new post here have something to do with Christian Angst. The most hilarious thing about Sci Forums is that many of you think you are 'oh so' scientific, but your main concern is God and Jesus. Do you not know that medieval monks were also greatly concerned and interested in the actual secular scientific questions asked on this forum? Mathematics, physics, astronomy, biology, politics... they were intrigued by them all. They would have given both their nuts to know what you guys know about pure science! And yet, as I've said, the majority of topics here concern Christ and his existence. Do you not know that medieval monks were constantly having doubts and searching for common sense proofs of Christ's historical reality and existence? Are you familiar with the term 'dark night of the soul'? Remember a few years back when the yellow press tried to make something of 'sainted' Mother Theresa having doubts about the existence of God? Well, of course she did! Was she stupid? Was she not a human being? I find it hilarious how many of you puzzle over religious questions, fancy yourself objective, modern, scientific and somehow superior to medieval monks because they believed in Jesus. They did and they didn't. Just like you! So stop crinkling your noses and acting like it's something that belongs on the far end of a shit stick every time someone asks a 'religious' question. You're interested because you live in a Christian culture, and you always wonder how much of it is true. Disbelieve as much as you please, but know that we're spiritual beings, and as dandy as the scientific method is, you will always be transfixed by spiritual threads. Those of you who kick and buck and say it is all nonsense are in any important way the most spiritual of all. Your resistance and eloquence in proving religion false just shows how important it is to you. L frikkin O frikkin L!

    (n.b. exchemist, please don't feel these remarks are aimed at you particularly - I am addressing all the anti-everything-is poop-but-what-I-think, anti-religious nuts)
     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2014
  18. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    Sounds like a description of most religious nuts.
     
  19. Jägermeister Registered Member

    Messages:
    15
    On the contrary, I find religion interesting from a scientific point of view, and Christianity in particular from an historical one. Spirituality has nothing to do with it.

    As to the importance of religion, then yes, it is important to me. Not only because we can see the physical dangers of religion, as can be seen in the middle east, but in the falsification of science by creationists in the USA.
     
  20. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,693
    What an interesting reply. I seem to have inadvertently trodden on a landmine.

    Let me clarify my previous remarks: the resistance is to introducing religion into science. I have frequently had occasion to remind people that there are many scientists who are religious and that the study of religion is worthwhile. (I am indeed a sort of rather agnostic fellow-traveller of Christianity myself.)

    But what we absolutely cannot have, in my view, is religion within science itself, as this contradicts the requirement that science be based on models of the physical world that are testable by objective observation.

    To me, science has the right tools for understanding the physical world. But for me this is not enough, as I find the humanities and the arts address other aspects of human experience that are more inward, or subjective, but are equally important concerns of the human race.

    I hope that is enough to make clear I am by no means disparaging religious enquiry as such: I just want to keep it out of science.
     
  21. phyti Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    356
    If you read REV 1, it tells you the message is revealed in signs, and therefore highly symbolic. Any references to dimensions, materials, etc. are not for literal interpretation.
    There is no basis for a mathematical challenge.
     
  22. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,583
    Agreed. Gould described this pretty well; they are two separate magisteria that do not really overlap, despite some people's insistence that they must.
     
  23. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,254
    Exchemist? He wrote that trying to introduce religion into science gets short shrift. I think that's probably as it should be, in the science fora at least. Even here in the religion forum such a move will probably be challenged and might need to be justified. That's not a bad thing either. That's when many of the most interesting issues arise.

    I'm not particularly scientific, certainly not professionally. I was a biological science undergraduate back in the day, but that was 40 years ago. My academic background since has been more in philosophy and religious studies. That's where my interests focus today, though I do retain an interest in the philosophy of science.

    Having said that, I'm not a Christian and never have been. God and Jesus don't interest me a great deal, except in the abstract. My own religiosity is of an entirely different sort.

    I agree with what I take your point to be, that the idea of science and religion being mortal enemies throughout history is a caricature.

    I can understand how some of the board's less sophisticated atheists might frustrate you. I feel the same way sometimes. But shooting wildly in all directions isn't the answer. I'll add that I think that Exchemist is one of the more thoughtful and interesting voices around here on these kind of matters.
     
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2014

Share This Page