What do you think of the newly elected Pope Francis I

Post Reply New Topic

It's called selective observation.

Too bad it wasn't 13:13

I don't think Catholicism believes that Revelations is primarily about things to be, but like most mainline Protestants, see the book as a history of things that had occurred, and what was in the 1st century current events.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

catholics can run the gamit from the new agie and mystical to the the main stream biblical interpritations to the fundamentalist.
catholicism isnt so much a denemination on the christian spectrum but more its own religion with its own spectrum of beliefs.

Not sure you understood that 8:13 PM extrapolates to 20:13 military time. Of course my saying that is all over pages 2 and 3 of this thread.

Last edited by techstepgenr8tion on 17 Mar 2013, 8:51 am, edited 1 time in total.

I explained this one pretty well in that thread you were joking around in but couldn't be bothered to read.

Just because I disagreed with you doesn't mean I hadn't read what you said.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

So I shouldn't take you seriously when you say several times in your own words specifically that you couldn't find the energy to read the OP. Thanks, I'll file that away for future reference.

Also if you remember from your reading I do believe that most of it is in the 1st century AD, just not all of it.

I certainly wasn't feeling good when I first breezed over your post, but I did get around to it.
And of course not everything in Revelations has happened yet - the sheep have yet to be divided from the goats.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Not sure you understood what I meant. Whether it's 8:13 or 20:13, it isn't 13:13. And so it's not as spectacular when the hour section is out of pattern.

Plus, even if it was 13:13, the probability wouldn't be as low as you'd think, and it wouldn't indicate anything beyond coincidence. You need to use more critical thinking.

EDIT: Oh, I get what you mean by 20:13 now. That still doesn't indicate anything beyond an interesting coincidence. It's highly probable for these patterns to happen every now and then.

If you believe its possible that they could, trip, fall, and land on that time by dumb luck then I'll leave you to it. For me that feels too much like a normalcy bias, like accepting that someone won three different state supper lottos in one day.

You're exaggerating. It's more like winning just one super lotto. Out of an infinite number of events that could potentially happen on a date and time perceived by a human as interesting, something has to eventually and inevitably happen at an interesting time and date. I don't think you realize the bias you yourself have towards this.

It would've been more interesting had it been 13:13, but whatever, one can't be too satisfied.

I just don't believe that when something's slapping you back and forth across the face this loudly that you can call it chance. There's a much more likely answer - human beings thumbed it until they got this result because they were interested in getting this result. Occam's much more friendly to that answer than to random chance in this case.

To answer the question:

Well, Frankly speaking......

ruveyn

Infinite events happen at times (that are considered interesting by humans who see patterns in things), and while most of these infinite events are very likely to be uninteresting, there has and will always be events that may be considered interesting by some human beings, and it just so happens that the announcement of the new Pope happened at a time that is considered interesting by you and others. But what about all the previous Popes? Were they all announced at times that were just as interesting? If not, why not?

And why March? What's so interesting about March itself?

Why wasn't the Pope announced at December 12, 2012, 12:12 am/pm (or 20:12 if that's what you prefer) Vatican time instead?

Selective observation is what you're doing really. You're ignoring all the other infinite events that happened at that time and focusing on the Pope thing only because you happen to find it interesting.

It's similar to prayer. Just because prayer may seem like it's working at times doesn't mean it actually does or that it always seems to work even.

Plus, what meaningful message does it send anyway? Nothing that I could conceive of.

And please leave Occam's out of it. You'd have to do a lot more than just say it can't be coincidence if you wish to rationally sway Occam's tool to your position.

Lol, you act as if I'm calling it proof of God. I'm only calling it proof of human churlishness.


Month of Mars. It has a great deal of implication.


Freemasonic and Hermetic groups like the number 13 a lot, similar to how they like 33, and have a propensity to put it all over everything. Lots of possibilities for the number 13: 6+7 (two prevelant numbers in the bible), Christ and apostles or apostles + Paul add up to 13, supposedly 13 days the star of Bethlehem hovered; the dodecahedtron is traced by twelve spheres around a core sphere which gives you the cube of Metatron. people have offered that there are 4 parts to the tetragrammaton, thee parts to the trinity so you have the unity (1) and the trinity (3). These are speculations but what isn't a speculation is the Hermetic and Masonic love of 13.


Back at ya. If you don't like what you see or if it feels to you too much like proof of some kind of conspiracy you can act as if I said 'God sent lightning to the dome and the meteors that weekend' and extend churlish human behavior to same claim of miracle. It doesn't work that way.


Again - we're not talking about something divine, we're talking about very human stupidity.


None, its not about sending a message so much as it is a Platonic/Pythagorean move. Platonists believe that by aligning objects or events with numbers, certain types of objects (aligned with celestial virtues), facing certain cardinal directions alligned with certain virtues you can create a sort of macro-chemistry to compound and embue 'virtues' (traits) into something. The common parlance for such behavior these days is 'occult magick'. You don't have to believe in any of that, just that its nothing new, nothing astronomically uncommon in terms of human behavior, all you have to do is take into account that there are humans out there who might believe something that you wouldn't.


Again, it becomes coincidence because it tells you something you don't want to believe. And people accuse theists of making it up as they go to fit their preferences.......

It doesn't change the truth of what I said. Nice how you didn't actually address it. Whether you're arguing for human manipulation or divine manipulation, the point still stands and I don't think you grasp the extent of the truth of it. Interesting patterns and coincidences are bound to happen sooner or later and, in fact, have happened infinite number of times.



One can say the same for every month. See what I mean by selective observation?



Selective observation once again. 12 can be a magic number as well. 12 months in a year, 12 tribes of ancient Israel, 12 original Apostles of Jesus, 12 signs of the Zodiac, twelve Olympian gods and goddesses, twelve Titans, 12 hours in half a day, and so on.

You can make fascinating about other numbers as well, such as 7 and 6 and 9 and larger numbers, etc.



You don't seem to like the fact that a conspiracy like what you speak of requires better evidence than what you've offered so far. Probability isn't a matter of just either zero or one. Random sh*t happens, and every now and then, random but interesting sh*t will happen because random sh*t happens, lol.

And even if you're not arguing for a god or anything spiritual/supernatural, the point you're trying to make is still flawed. I don't have a problem with the existence of conspiracies, but I take issue with simpler explanations being forcefully overwritten by more complex explanations without much back up.