So why Jesus?

[Ricky Spanish]

Apparently, the two most influential religions around right now are predicting an apocalypse, aka, the day of judgment, aka eschatology.

Why is one more prophetic than the other?

[Brownie]

Do these two influential religions have names, Ricky?
Must admit, the only times I have ever encountered "end times" prophencies have been on forums.

[floo]

Do these two influential religions have names, Ricky?
Must admit, the only times I have ever encountered "end times" prophencies have been on forums.

Lucky you!

[Ricky Spanish]

You not religious then Brownnose?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Apparently, the two most influential religions around right now are predicting an apocalypse, aka, the day of judgment, aka eschatology.

Why is one more prophetic than the other?

Not only religion Mr Spanish:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/25/13-crises-we-face-trump-soil-loss-global-collapse

[Brownie]

You not religious then Brownnose?

Cheeky s*d.

[Hope]

You not religious then Brownnose?

Is that your level of discussion, Ricky?

[Brownie]

He is only havin' a larf, Hope.

I was thinking, this and the "Repent, the end is nigh" thread are compatible.  I posted something on that thread but was thinking of this one at the time, what I said was just as relevant to this.

It's a popular subject on forums.   Very interesting to read about the Islamic and Jewish teachings on the apocalypse.

[Sassy]

Apparently, the two most influential religions around right now are predicting an apocalypse, aka, the day of judgment, aka eschatology.

Why is one more prophetic than the other?

Do you not realise you are just hardening your heart towards God.

Which one is more prophetic and which one has the track record of prophesies coming true?

[floo]

Do you not realise you are just hardening your heart towards God.

Which one is more prophetic and which one has the track record of prophesies coming true?

YADDA YADDA!

[NicholasMarks]

Do you not realise you are just hardening your heart towards God.

Which one is more prophetic and which one has the track record of prophesies coming true?

I'm becoming more and more convinced that those who are taking the mickey out of Almighty God and Jesus are also taking the mickey out of themselves and their own unpleasant future, Sassy.

If I were to tell Floo and Ricky of a forthcoming terrible event because I was in the know and they sneered and scoffed and tried to tell me I'd got it all wrong and then that terrible event occurs but they weren't prepared...who will be able to help them??...especially when so many others who had tried to prepare needed help as well. That is what Revelation is telling us, but it is also saying that God will give fair warning by the approach of signs in the heavens and these are certainly evident now...in this day and age...so Floo and Ricky, and a few others, should reconsider their stance as a matter of some urgency...else become cannon fodder of the promise in Revelation 21:8.



 

[Brownie]

Everyone outside his family thought Noah was mad and they didn't heed warnings.

[trippymonkey]

So we must have an EXACT date in the Bible eh?
Whaddya mean NO?!?!!!?!?

End of the world has been said soooo many times since it was invented.

[floo]

Everyone outside his family thought Noah was mad and they didn't heed warnings.

He probably was bonkers as there is no evidence to support a worldwide flood!

[Hope]

He probably was bonkers as there is no evidence to support a worldwide flood!

Floo, you seem to make two completely unrelated claims here.  Firstly, there are plenty of flood stories from a variety of cultures around the world, and evidence for several - even if they aren't necessarily for a single worldwide event.

Secondly, you are talking with the benefit of hindsight which is a poor evidentary argument; after all, Noah was necessarily working before any event occurred. 

Thirdly, you are treating the Biblical Flood account as if it was a historical event when it occurs in a part of the Book of Genesis that has been proven to have been written in the 5th or 6th century BC - so definitely not a historical record - and deemed by an increasing number of scholars (Biblical and otherwise) to have been a theological treatise on the difference between the Jews' own God and the deities of the Babylonians.

[Hope]

So we must have an EXACT date in the Bible eh?
Whaddya mean NO?!?!!!?!?

Nick, the Bible tells us that it is the nature of every human being to die.  Does it give the EXACT date for my death, your death, the death of anyone on this board - let alone the date of the death of every human being currently alive or now deceased, or of those who are yet to be born?

[Gordon]

Secondly, you are talking with the benefit of hindsight which is a poor evidentary argument; after all, Noah was necessarily working before any event occurred. 

Nonsense - hindsight is clearly a strong position when looking for extant evidence of anything: the evidence (whatever it may be) must precede your investigation excepting where the evidence is a precursor of the main event, such as the monitoring of active volcanoes.

In this case, since we are talking about the extent of historical floods, I'm struggling to see how any evidence doesn't involve 'hindsight'.

[Hope]

Nonsense - hindsight is clearly a strong position when looking for extant evidence of anything: the evidence (whatever it may be) must precede your investigation excepting where the evidence is a precursor of the main event, such as the monitoring of active volcanoes.

In this case, since we are talking about the extent of historical floods, I'm struggling to see how any evidence doesn't involve 'hindsight'.

Gordon, I would suggest that looking for the evidence of something 'after the event' is 'looking for something 'after the event''. It isn't hindsight - 'Understanding of a situation or event only after it has happened or developed' oxforddictionaries.com  For instance, I'm not sure that one would refer to the work that police do in tracking down a burglar or murderer as 'hindsight'.

[Gordon]

Gordon, I would suggest that looking for the evidence of something 'after the event' is 'looking for something 'after the event''. It isn't hindsight - 'Understanding of a situation or event only after it has happened or developed' oxforddictionaries.com  For instance, I'm not sure that one would refer to the work that police do in tracking down a burglar or murderer as 'hindsight'.

Then you need to be more careful in your choice of terms: since in your reply to Floo's specific point about there being no evidence for a world-wide flood you introduced the term when you said in response 'Secondly, you are talking with the benefit of hindsight which is a poor evidentary argument'

[floo]

Floo, you seem to make two completely unrelated claims here.  Firstly, there are plenty of flood stories from a variety of cultures around the world, and evidence for several - even if they aren't necessarily for a single worldwide event.

Secondly, you are talking with the benefit of hindsight which is a poor evidentary argument; after all, Noah was necessarily working before any event occurred. 

Thirdly, you are treating the Biblical Flood account as if it was a historical event when it occurs in a part of the Book of Genesis that has been proven to have been written in the 5th or 6th century BC - so definitely not a historical record - and deemed by an increasing number of scholars (Biblical and otherwise) to have been a theological treatise on the difference between the Jews' own God and the deities of the Babylonians.

I don't treat the flood as a historical event because it isn't credible, nor is the story of Noah and his ark, but Biblical literalists do think it is factual.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I don't treat the flood as a historical event because it isn't credible, nor is the story of Noah and his ark, but Biblical literalists do think it is factual.

And indeed, literal.