They say the end of the world is coming.

[Cygnus]

The earth is only about 6000 years old

My name is Elma J. Fuudd. I am a millionaire. I own a mansion unt a yatch.

 

[ihateiraq]

oh. hes serious about the 6k year old earth thing....hmmm.

 

[Cygnus]

13 the beast is rising, the Frenchman did surmise
Through earthquakes and starvation, the warlord will arise
Terror, death, destruction pour from the eastern sands
But the truth of all predictions is always in your hands







Up the Irons!

 

[evansvillethompsongunner]

From what I have found, on the original topic of this thread, about the "end of the world" happening in 2012 because the Mayan calendar stops then, is nothing to be concerned about. This is just a little piece of info I found while searching this topic.
"The date December 21st, 2012 A.D. (13.0.0.0.0 in the Long Count), represents an extremely close conjunction of the Winter Solstice Sun with the crossing point of the Galactic Equator (Equator of the Milky Way) and the Ecliptic (path of the Sun).
They measured long time periods by means of a Long Count, in which one 360-day year (a "Tun"), consists of 18 x 20-day "months" ("Uinals"). Twenty of these Tuns is a Katun; 20 Katuns is a Baktun (nearly 400 years); and 13 Baktuns adds up to a "Great Cycle" of 1,872,000 days, ( 5200 Tuns, or about 5125 years).

Mayan scholars have been attempting to correlate the Long Count with our Western Gregorian calendar, since the beginning of this century. There has been massive variation in the suggested correlations, but as early as 1905, Goodman suggested a correlation only 3 days from the most popular one today. Known as the GMT correlation, or "correlation # 584283", this was finalized in 1950, and puts the start of the Great Cycle ( day 0.0.0.0.0) on 11th August 3114 BC, and the end-date (known as 13.0.0.0.0.) as 21st December 2012."
All of this info was found on this site, that site's it's sources (and there are a lot of them) at the bottom of the page.
http://www.greatdreams.com/2012.htm​

I haven't done much research on this, but wasn't their calendar inscribed on a giant circular tablet of stone?

Circles only have so much room on them.... bound to run out of space eventually.

 

[LEaSH]

Not only is the earth much, much younger than so called scientists would have you believe, it's also really really flat. Nowhere in the bible does it refer to the earth as a sphere. There's a reason for that.

 

[ihateiraq]

Not only is the earth much, much younger than so called scientists would have you believe, it's also really really flat. Nowhere in the bible does it refer to the earth as a sphere. There's a reason for that.

i cant really tell if this is sarcasm or not...

 

[SavageEagle]

Not only is the earth much, much younger than so called scientists would have you believe, it's also really really flat. Nowhere in the bible does it refer to the earth as a sphere. There's a reason for that.

What I can't fathom is how they could think the earth was flat. Nothing else in the sky was flat, so what made them think they would fall of the edge of the earth?

I almost reminds me of Apocolipto when they got to the temple. Those at the top knew the eclipse was coming but blatantly used it to their advantage. It makes you wonder if they knew these kinds of things and didn't tell the masses so as to be able to "corral" them, so to speak, what are they hiding from us now?

The Vatican for example. (Yes I know, we've been here before) They have the library with sections only the upper echelon is allowed to view. Why would they not release all their knowledge of the world and beyond to the people?

 

[kingnereli]

Not only is the earth much, much younger than so called scientists would have you believe, it's also really really flat. Nowhere in the bible does it refer to the earth as a sphere. There's a reason for that.

Actually, it does.

Isaiah 40:22 "It is he that sitteth on the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in (emphasis mine)

The word translated "circle" here is the Hebrew word "khug" which means spherical.

It is also worth mentioning that around 28 centuries ago the prevailing view of the earth was that it was flat and rested upon the back of an animal or some greek god. However, Job seemed to have more insight.

Job 26:7 "He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing."

I know your post was sarcasm but I think it is interesting that it is actually in there.

oh. hes serious about the 6k year old earth thing....hmmm.

That is another one of those things that we Christians often disagree on. If I recall correctly, the 6000 year people use the genealogies to count the generations back to Adam. The two glaring flaws in that system are that Hebrew genealogies only include important family members so there could be gigantic gaps. "Begat" doesn't necessarily mean "daddy." Also, we don't know how long Adam and Even were in the garden. While the Bible covers the story in a few chapters we are given no time frame between their creation and eviction from the garden. Then, you could get into the mess of whether or not "day" in Genesis refers to 24 hours or an era of time.

I'm not an atheist, but thanks for the assumption. I'm an agnostic.

My apologies. It is almost as hard to keep track of the different brands of skepticism as it is Christian denominations.

I believe it is supremely arrogant to proclaim to know that which is unknowable, and to use that to proselytize to people in order to "save" them from themselves.

Me Too!! However, the Christian position is that we have come to know what would otherwise be unknowable because God has revealed it and himself to us and that he is personally involved in the lives of his creation. There are Christians of many different stripes but the Bible does not teach elitism.

Demeaning and pointless? Sounds like most religion to me. Somebody has to be wrong, and therefore, "condemned."

Maybe, but skepticism fits into the pool of people who argue about God and somebody has to be wrong. If you have a belief about God at all; even that he doesn't exist then there are consequences for being wrong.

But I guess it's not demeaning to tell someone that they were created only to be damned for eternity by a "loving" god, whose fan club you just happen to be a member of.

I'm not sure what you are saying here. Is it that you think Christians believe some people are created solely so that God can throw them into hell? Either way, the concept of salvation is simple in some ways and complex in others. Here is the short version of how people get to hell.

God loves everyone and wants no one to go to hell. God is wholly righteous and holy. God is also a God of justice. God gave man free will. Man used and continues to use free will to reject and rebel from God. God is a God of mercy and forgiveness and provided a way to be free from the just punishment for our rebellion. God only requires man to use his free will to accept this gift. To not accept the escape is to accept the punishment. People only go to hell if they want to.


How about I get on this board and proclaim that Islam is the one true faith, and I love you all, so you should disavow Christianity. Really, I'm just concerned that you are blaspheming the one, true god Allah by proclaiming that he had a son. You can save your soul today by submitting to the one true religion. Please bow to Mecca now, I love you all and want you enjoy the 72 virgins promised to you in eternity by Mohammed. This is true, and arguing about it will make no difference. It will be like saying that the sky is not blue...you may say so, but the fact remains that it is blue.

How do you like them apples? Or do you even understand my point?

Feel free if you like, but know this. If I choose to participate in that conversation will be done respectfully. I won't be slinging any poo because you disagree with me. Religion is rarely a constructive topic only because we let our emotional biases overthrow our reason.

 

[ruger17hmr]

With few exceptions the doctrinal differences between Christian denominations do not reflect issues that could be considered fundamental. Some baptize through submersion and some sprinkle. Some have church on Saturday and some on Sunday. It isn't the self righteous power struggle you make it out to be. However, to know that you would have to look deeper into the matter then what can be found on the internet.





Yes, because we all know that it is the confrontational atheists that are the superlative examples of how to get along and agree on everything. Posts like this are far too common in this type of discussion. Instead of engaging the topic with someone you disagree with you sought to discredit and insult him. It is just petty to wholly mischaracterize the argument and cite spelling errors as reason to subvert the posts intent.

You are obviously hung up on the concept of hell. Surely you know that flightsimmer's intent was not to condemn everyone who disagrees with him to hell but to offer an escape from that fate. Yet, rather then discussing it with humility (in other words...like an adult) you slung this demeaning and pointless blather. If given the choice between between the holier-than-thou proselytizer and the fist-shaking, mad at the sky atheist I would choose the former.

I do believe that there do exist power struggle within Christian denominations, although, it is not as severe as the Sunni and Shiite within Muslim.

How about the struggle between Catholics and protestants? I know that is a totally different issue, but...

I am not out to defame the Christianity. I am however trying to point out the dark and manipulative human nature that will stop at nothing to further his greed, including the manipulation of sacred religion.

 

[kingnereli]

I do believe that there do exist power struggle within Christian denominations, although, it is not as severe as the Sunni and Shiite within Muslim.

You would have to define what you mean by power struggle. There are definitely a few divisive issues in which Christian groups want to legitimize their point of view. It is almost always a moral issue rather then a power struggle. Most issues within Christianity are between two or more well intentioned people/groups that have a genuine concern for adherence to biblical authority.

How about the struggle between Catholics and protestants? I know that is a totally different issue, but...

Don't get me started. No, seriously, there are serious and wide ranging doctrinal disagreements here. To understand this sort of thing you have to try to understand the other side's world view. This thread(jack) is a good example. You may disagree with the conclusion but the Christian world view is that humans are victims of self inflicted depravation and the requirement for this sin condition according to the standards of a holy god is eternal punishment. However, this holy god is also loving enough to provide a way of paying the debt. So, if a Christian comes on this forum or knocks on your door and says "You are a sinner and are going to hell if you don't repent" as abrasive as that may sound, insult isn't the intent. We simply hope that you will, as we did, acknowledge your current condition.

I am not out to defame the Christianity. I am however trying to point out the dark and manipulative human nature that will stop at nothing to further his greed, including the manipulation of sacred religion.

I suppose I can't really argue with you there. That is the depravity I'm referring to. It never completely goes away in this life.

 

[ruger17hmr]

There are many divisive issues among Christian denominations and none of them are moral issue. I refer them as power struggle, for it is almost always about garnering influence over the general population. (I realize it sounds too drastic and inciting.) It is not much different from the power struggle between Catholics and Protestants, although as I stated before not as severe.

Catholics has been losing much ground in many areas, among them decimated number of followers, which translates into less financial and political clout. Vatican fears that it is losing its grip as the world spiritual leader. (BTW, It already has.) And gone are the days when they could simply imprison the opposition. It will do everything in its power to preserve its power/influence, including conforming to the mass; allowing gay marriage, electing gay priest, silencing the priests' sexual abuse allegations for decades, what's next?

The current divisiveness amomg the Christian denominations are not severe, due in part there is no need for it. There is no persecution of one group over the other - survivability issue is not at hand. Simply put, there is no monopoly as it was with the Catholics with the iron fist in the old days. However, there exist fear that one denomination might become too powerful, so the struggle ensues, although benign for now.

If you only look at the human nature and history of the religion, it is not difficult to predict what lies ahead of multi-denominated Christianity.

Just my humble opinion.

 

[PatMcGroyne]

There are many things to worry us. But all may agree that there iS only ONEWAY. But just WHAT it is is in dispute. I say, if your relig. tells you to chop off ears, hands, heads, etc, then you and the whole of your 'religion' must be exterminated. And, in the meantime, we just might run out of fossil-fuel to keep us all warm and coz - - - -no, wait: they've just discovered 300,000,000,000 (billion) barrels of oil under Il, IN, OH, PA and NY. Just a bit deeper than they thought! What we've been tapping out was just minimal seepage to the top! And Alberta Can. has another 600-bill. If we need to, we can just annex, by gun, Alberta, and have it easy. Those Cannuks don't have any weapons left, do they? But, what is 'true religion, and undefiled'?? Pat.

 

[PatMcGroyne]

God is both sweet and righteous. It is His love that lets us continue in our sinning against Him. Also, He would like it very much if -- when you refer to Him -- you would use a capital-letter on each Holy-noun and pronoun. It makes hour references to Him stand out against ordinary pronouns. Pat

 

[ThrottleJockey]

they've just discovered 300,000,000,000 (billion) barrels of oil under Il, IN, OH, PA and NY. Just a bit deeper than they thought! What we've been tapping out was just minimal seepage to the top! And Alberta Can. has another 600-bill. If we need to, we can just annex, by gun, Alberta, and have it easy.

The problem is that not one single drop of this oil will EVER be used here in the good old USA. Our EPA and the tree huggers have made sure of this. The cost involved in distilling this stuff into a usable product here is far too great. Unless you're okay with $75 a gallon gasoline....

 

[ThrottleJockey]

Won't even get into how the bible is not the word of God but simply a man's interpretation of God's word.

Yes!!! Don't you just love how the Vatican and King James decided which of Gods words to include and which ones to leave out? In their own self serving interest, they "cannonized" only the books that aided in their own greed for power, control and lust for money completely ignoring the rest of the story. I have a friend that keeps telling me God would never let this happen, but he also doesn't understand free will. Nor does he grasp the concept of Jesus Christ being both God and man.

 

[kingnereli]

Yes!!! Don't you just love how the Vatican and King James decided which of Gods words to include and which ones to leave out? In their own self serving interest, they "cannonized" only the books that aided in their own greed for power, control and lust for money completely ignoring the rest of the story. I have a friend that keeps telling me God would never let this happen, but he also doesn't understand free will. Nor does he grasp the concept of Jesus Christ being both God and man.

This is the height of historical revisionism.

 

[PatMcGroyne]

Let's keep one thing in mind:

It's NOT the end of the world, but just the end of the world as we know it!! Buy more bullets, bacon & beans. You'll make it through O.K. PAT

 

[Ephraimlad]

I used to be a dispensationalist, and I used to believe in the "end of the world." I have since found that the Bible does not speak of the "end of time" or the end of the physical universe; the apocalyptic language was covenantal in nature and not to be taken literally. There is much money being made by exploiting people's fears. 2012? That is simply when the Myan calendar ends. No further meaning can be extrapolated. Here is a question: if the end of the physical universe is at hand, why polish the brass on a sinking ship? Why set up the deck chairs on the Titanic? More to the point - why bother chambering up a few rounds? Who will be left to protect and survive?

 

[Carrion]

Religion is rarely a constructive topic only because we let our emotional biases overthrow our reason.

From the rest of your post I made you for the religious type, but now you take an athiest turn, speaking or letting reason determine things.

 

[Bill of Rights]

For those discussing the age of the world, the Jewish calendar is based on the beginning of the world. This is the year 5771.

Note that I do not put any more faith in that than I do in our calendar having some unknown start ("B.C.", or "B.C.E.", if you prefer) and it's duration determined by a particular, arbitrary religious event.

I post this solely for the relevant fact requested in the thread about the Biblical comment upon the age of our planet.

We now return you to your conversation, already in progress.

Blessings,
Bill