How Do Stars Fall?

[Universal Mind]

Could somebody please explain the physics of how stars "fall"? "... the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from Heaven, and the powers of the Heavens shall be shaken." Matthew 24: 29 http://www.preteristarchive.com/StudyBible...thew_24-29.html

[joey11223]

hmm, obviously this was ment for simple minded people to grasp, with no space knowledge... Urm.. well that makes it seem that stars are in our own atmosphere, which is now proven not to be true, but may have been a believe at the time, which supports the claim the bible ws just written by the people of the time, which is why so many things dont make sense now...but.. I suppose its trying to help us understand that a star will die and no longer shine, thus the moon wont either, but your right in that they dont crash to Earth, that doesnt make sense at all...

[Uviteru]

Could somebody please explain the physics of how stars "fall"? "... the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from Heaven, and the powers of the Heavens shall be shaken." Matthew 24: 29 http://www.preteristarchive.com/StudyBible...thew_24-29.html [/b] I beleive they were saying they will go dark....

[Universal Mind]

I beleive they were saying they will go dark.... [/b] So a light bulb "falls" when it burns out? If a light bulb in the house stays in one place and burns out and somebody asks why it won't turn on, it would make sense to say, "The light bulb fell."?

[Uviteru]

So a light bulb "falls" when it burns out? If a light bulb in the house stays in one place and burns out and somebody asks why it won't turn on, it would make sense to say, "The light bulb fell."? [/b] maybe fall out of sight? let me read some on this and ill make a post

[Jeremysr]

I think it means meteorites. What else was Matthew supposed to call them? I doubt they had a word for meteors. They probably only had one word for all the little dots of light in the sky: star.

[taihen]

Argh, its another massive scientific mistake that Christians will have to justify by claiming that's its a metaphor or a translation error. Doesn't make much difference in the long run though, there are many. Better just to ignore them.

[juroara]

how was the text in any way a scientifical text in the bible? since when in science is the moon also a she, and how does heaven 'shake'? when the word heaven has always been used to mean everything above earth - including the rest of the universe? how will the powers of the universe be shaken? stop taking the bible out of context. stop taking everything in the bible as literal when Jesus himself admits to speaking in parables. stop nit-picking parts of the bible without showing the rest of what was being said that helps illustrate how to understand the text as being metaphorical or literal.

[taihen]

how was the text in any way a scientifical text in the bible?[/b] When it is meant to be taken as true, it becomes an error. Are you saying that it is wrong? stop taking the bible out of context. [/b] And how am I doing that? stop taking everything in the bible as literal when Jesus himself admits to speaking in parables. [/b] There are many Christians who take the bible completely as literal fact. Why cant I? Are all those Christians wrong? stop nit-picking parts of the bible without showing the rest of what was being said that helps illustrate how to understand the text as being metaphorical or literal. [/b] Where is the text that indicates that this part of Matthew should be taken as a metaphor? Nowhere.

[Universal Mind]

how was the text in any way a scientifical text in the bible? since when in science is the moon also a she, and how does heaven 'shake'? when the word heaven has always been used to mean everything above earth - including the rest of the universe? how will the powers of the universe be shaken? stop taking the bible out of context. stop taking everything in the bible as literal when Jesus himself admits to speaking in parables. stop nit-picking parts of the bible without showing the rest of what was being said that helps illustrate how to understand the text as being metaphorical or literal. [/b] You dodged. How do stars "fall"? Tell us what you think it means.

[Jeremysr]

Yes, try actually reading the Bible sometime to see what it's like instead of making topics like this when you happen to see a certain verse that makes you think "I could use this to prove them wrong!" Also, there is a lot of scientific stuff in the book of Job. For example people think the Bible says the earth is flat but a literal translation of Job 26:10 says "He described a circle upon the face of the waters, until the day and night come to an end." There's also other parts of the Bible like Isaiah 40:22: "It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth..."

[taihen]

You dodged.[/b] Whew. Thanks for catching that one...

[Jeremysr]

Argh, its another massive scientific mistake that Christians will have to justify by claiming that's its a metaphor or a translation error. Doesn't make much difference in the long run though, there are many. Better just to ignore them. [/b] It's not a scientific mistake. There was no other way for Matthew to write that. He had no word for..whatever he wanted to say! The Bible had to be written so that as long as it lived (forever) people would understand it, AND it would be truthful. This verse may be more evidence of the Bible being true instead of false. Did they ever see a "star" fall (to the earth)? Did they know what meteorites were? Probably not, but they still talked about it happening in this verse! (At least that's how I understand it: metorites)

[taihen]

It's not a scientific mistake. There was no other way for Matthew to write that. He had no word for..whatever he wanted to say! [/b] WHERE did you get that? Are you pretending that you some apostle from 2000 odd years ago? You don't know what he wanted to say! The Bible had to be written so that as long as it lived (forever) people would understand it, AND it would be truthful.[/b] If they wanted it to be truthful, they should have said 'gone dark' This verse may be more evidence of the Bible being true instead of false. Did they ever see a "star" fall (to the earth)? Did they know what meteorites were? Probably not, but they still talked about it happening in this verse! (At least that's how I understand it: metorites) [/b] That's how YOU have 'understood' it, which means twisted it. HOW THE HELL do you know what they are trying to say? Is it because your pastor told you? Think for yourself? HOW DO STARS FALL?

[Jeremysr]

HOW DO STARS FALL?[/b] They can't! What do you think it could mean, if the Bible was true? The only thing that makes sense to me is meteorites. But it's really not that important. I am just thinking like a person who doesn't know much about science. He's writing a prophecy and he looks up in the sky and suddenly sees a bunch of white lights streaking across the sky and then big fireballs of rock falling down. So he writes that the stars will fall down out of the sky. If he said that meteorites were going to fall from the sky (if that's what he meant) would anyone understand him? Nope, there was no word for meteorites. Does this make sense to you yet?

[taihen]

They can't! [/b] Thank you, the bible is wrong. If he said that meteorites were going to fall from the sky (if that's what he meant) would anyone understand him? Nope, there was no word for meteorites. Does this make sense to you yet? [/b] He couldn't SAY that meteorites if there was no word for them. What ARE you talking about? He could have believed that they actually WERE stars that fell from the sky, in which case he is STILL wrong. Therefore, the bible is completely wrong. Finished.

[juroara]

When it is meant to be taken as true, it becomes an error. Are you saying that it is wrong? And how am I doing that? There are many Christians who take the bible completely as literal fact. Why cant I? Are all those Christians wrong? Where is the text that indicates that this part of Matthew should be taken as a metaphor? Nowhere. [/b] truth is not always literal as you know it. several parts of the bible are metaphorical - that doesnt make them any less true. it means its meaning is more than just human affairs. I wasnt talking to you, did you start this thread? Some christians take the entire bible as literal, but the MAJORITY dont. This idea of using the bible as a literal tool and using it against mainstream christianity doesn't make sense then since so many christians recognize several versus as being metaphorical. Recognize the diversity of christianity, the fundamentalist and the non-fundamentalists, both are christians. You can't use the same argument against both or tell the non-fundies they are not christians. The text doesnt say metaphor or literal. However, Jesus says he speaks in parables - even when he is speaking of a very literal event, it has a deeper meaning in it. Virtually all christians understand that Jesus' words have a deeper meaning to them, and are not what they appear to mean. The temple would fall in rise in three days, this was a clear example of how even the people around Jesus thought he was speaking literally. He was and he wasn't. Becuase Jesus sees the human body as the most important temple of all.

[Universal Mind]

Yes, try actually reading the Bible sometime to see what it's like instead of making topics like this when you happen to see a certain verse that makes you think "I could use this to prove them wrong!" Also, there is a lot of scientific stuff in the book of Job. For example people think the Bible says the earth is flat but a literal translation of Job 26:10 says "He described a circle upon the face of the waters, until the day and night come to an end." There's also other parts of the Bible like Isaiah 40:22: "It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth..." [/b] I very politely asked what it meant. This is a forum for religious discussion. Did you know that? If you were confident about your religious views, you would see this as an opportunity and not an attack. If Matthew thought meteorites were stars, why did his false understanding get printed as "the word of God"? I keep reading stuff about how the authors of the Bible had false scientific understandings. If that is the case and the Bible is just a book written by humans under their false understandings of reality, then what is the relevance of what is written in the Bible? What is so sacred about it?

[taihen]

I wasnt talking to you, did you start this thread? [/b] No. This is a forum discussion. Some christians take the entire bible as literal, but the MAJORITY dont. This idea of using the bible as a literal tool and using it against mainstream christianity doesn't make sense then since so many christians recognize several versus as being metaphorical.[/b] You didn't answer my question. If you take it literally, it is wrong. Either you admit that Christians that take the Bible literally are wrong, or you admit the bible is wrong. Also, you talking on behalf of all Christians, and later on you mention 'Virtually all christians understand'. That is a huge generalisation to make. The text doesnt say metaphor or literal. However, Jesus says he speaks in parables - even when he is speaking of a very literal event, it has a deeper meaning in it. [/b] You didn't answer my question. This was not a parable, why should we be lead to believe that this is metaphorical? 'Virtually all christians understand [it to be so]' doesn't cut it.

[Universal Mind]

If he said that meteorites were going to fall from the sky (if that's what he meant) would anyone understand him? Nope, there was no word for meteorites. Does this make sense to you yet? [/b] If the Bible is the word of God or even just divinely inspired, Matthew could have explained what meteorites are. Instead, he used a word that means something totally different. I know that we call meteorites "shooting stars", but that is metaphoric and not misleading because people with basic scientific knowledge know it is a metaphor. That is not the case with the Bible. When it was written, everybody thought "shooting stars" really were stars. If the Bible says "stars" and doesn't even specify them as "shooting stars", it seems to be suggesting that stars really do fall. What do you think?

[Jeremysr]

I very politely asked what it meant. This is a forum for religious discussion. Did you know that? If you were confident about your religious views, you would see this as an opportunity and not an attack. If Matthew thought meteorites were stars, why did his false understanding get printed as "the word of God"? I keep reading stuff about how the authors of the Bible had false scientific understandings. If that is the case and the Bible is just a book written by humans under their false understandings of reality, then what is the relevance of what is written in the Bible? What is so sacred about it? [/b] Well maybe he did know that they weren't really stars. But in his language (I don't even know what language it was, but I'm pretty sure they didn't know about anything in the sky other than sun/moon/stars) "star" was the only word he had to describe this event. Just try to imagine that his prophecy was true and he did know this was going to happen, and try to imagine what he would write so that everyone on earth in that time and in the future for us would understand what it meant. I don't know what "sacred" means but the Bible is important to me because it's like a guidebook to life and it's the main way God speaks to us. If the Bible is the word of God or even just divinely inspired, Matthew could have explained what meteorites are. Instead, he used a word that means something totally different. I know that we call meteorites "shooting stars", but that is metaphoric and not misleading because people with basic scientific knowledge know it is a metaphor. That is not the case with the Bible. When it was written, everybody thought "shooting stars" really were stars. If the Bible says "stars" and doesn't even specify them as "shooting stars", it seems to be suggesting that stars really do fall. What do you think? [/b] I don't know because I'm not sure what word he used when he first wrote it. Maybe it meant "a bright light in the sky." That could be a lot of things, including meteors and asteroids, but all the lights in the sky were the same to them.

[taihen]

Well maybe he did know that they weren't really stars. But in his language (I don't even know what language it was, but I'm pretty sure they didn't know about anything in the sky other than sun/moon/stars) "star" was the only word he had to describe this event.[/b] I'm sorry, but this is the LAST time you are making up crap and posting it as truth. You don't even know what fucking language they spoke in (aramaic, but the first written new testament we have was in greek) and you are 'pretty sure' they they didn't know anything about the sky? The WORD meteor comes from greek. The greek word for meteoris μετέωρο. Just try to imagine that his prophecy was true and he did know this was going to happen, and try to imagine what he would write so that everyone on earth in that time and in the future for us would understand what it meant.[/b] We DONT understand what he meant, that's what we are debating here. So STOP posting unstubstatiated opinion based on NOTHING WHATSOEVER. Go research, or keep quiet.

[Jeremysr]

Another possiblity (although I think my previous explanation is very likely) is that it could be hydrogen bombs being dropped. Don't they use the same energy as stars? (Are they mini-stars?) Anyway, that's probably not what he meant, but it might make more sense to you.

[taihen]

Another possiblity (although I think my previous explanation is very likely) is that it could be hydrogen bombs being dropped. [/b] Your previous explaination is as of yet unsubstantiated, but I have no interest in that at the moment, this new trinket intrigues me. Hydrogen bombs? Are you perhaps a member of the Church of Scientology? Don't they use the same energy as stars? (Are they mini-stars?) Anyway, that's probably not what he meant, but it might make more sense to you. [/b] Yes, in fact Hydrogen bombs work on fusion, which is same process that happens inside stars. There is almost no likelyhood of your being right, but why the hell would they be hydrogen bombs around this time? I am certain that must have some link to Scientology.

[juroara]

You dodged. How do stars "fall"? Tell us what you think it means. [/b] I didnt dodge the question. I was asking you not to misquote the bible. since people are lazy they will not read the entire verse, only that mere sentance. This is not how you intrepret the bible, anymore than how you would intrepret any other reading at school. Context matters. there are many slight variations, which matter apparently since you are being anal over a single word, for example. 26"So if anyone tells you, 'There he is, out in the desert,' do not go out; or, 'Here he is, in the inner rooms,' do not believe it. 27For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. 28Wherever there is a carcass, there the vultures will gather. 29"Immediately after the distress of those days " 'the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.'[c] 30"At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory. 31And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other." This variation says "its light" for the moon, another says "her light". This variation says "from the sky", another variation says "from the heavens" I find your question as how to do stars 'fall' not relative. The real question is what does it mean. If you understand the new testiment then you understand that Jesus and his apostles referred back to the old testiment A LOT. Some of things they said and did that made no sense make sense when you understand who and what they are referring to. Thanks to bible people, they have put footnotes for us showing to whom they are referring to. Here it is believed Jesus is referring to Isaiah, prophesizing about the fall of Babylon "10 The stars of heaven and their constellations will not show their light. The rising sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light. 11 I will punish the world for its evil, the wicked for their sins. I will put an end to the arrogance of the haughty and will humble the pride of the ruthless. 12 I will make man scarcer than pure gold, more rare than the gold of Ophir. 13 Therefore I will make the heavens tremble; and the earth will shake from its place at the wrath of the LORD Almighty, in the day of his burning anger. " one variation another Isaiah verse that is believed that Jesus was referring to " 4 All the stars of the heavens will be dissolved and the sky rolled up like a scroll; all the starry host will fall like withered leaves from the vine, like shriveled figs from the fig tree." . . very. . . poetic! and when the bible is poetic, thats normally a clear sign to not take it so literally. Especially when the word 'like' is used. Even third graders know when the word 'like' is used it denotes METAPHOR. I don't presume to know what Jesus means in this case. Even when he is referring to the old testiment, he tends to add a new twist to it.