Originally posted by robbie carrobieMany different interpretations have been made of biblical phrases, including the one you rely on, by people of undoubted Christian faith. I am not saying that your reading of the phrase is unreasonable but I am saying that it is only one of many reasonable ways to read it and many good Christians read it differenly to you.
I have provided a time frame, the epoch beginning with the first truly global conflict. Feel free to refute it or provide an alternative which is as reasonable.
For the data on earthquakes, on the other hand, your reading is certainly not reasonable and the reasons given by myself and others explain why. You are without doubt obstinately trying to force a preferred meaning onto data that is unsuitable for your requirements.
With that in mind, one might consider the possibility also that you are trying a little too hard to make the biblical text mean what you would prefer to hear. Humility is not a bad quality to foster in such situations. One cannot at the same time insist on being right and care about the truth.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSince the prophesy is of the End of the World I don't think that that's a valid distinction. Sadly for you I'm good at details, your OP starts with the sentence: "In view of the tragic recent events in Japan and Ecuador are any of the doubters still insistent that we have not seen a marked increase in the frequency and magnitude of seismic activity as prophesied by the Christ in the book of Matthew, chapter 24.". This is clearly a claim that the prophesy is being fulfilled. You've made a prediction and are trying to weasel your way out of it.
I must point out your rather glaring error, its not a prediction concerning the 'end of the world' as you have also erroneously assumed, its simply an attempt to understand a prophecy and its composite parts, which we did not author nor originate. But hey you were never really one for details. 😵
Yes the scientific data does support my position, ...[text shortened]... r assumed values on your assumptions to form a rather large steaming pile of. . . . assumption.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
Originally posted by robbie carrobie8.0 was your figure in the post I was replying to. Did you have data for 8.0?
Actually 'my choice' as you put it was greater than 6.99. Secondly since many earthquakes are significantly below this range and undetectable without specialist equipment it would make NO SENSE for us to utilise them in reference to a composite sign, would it? I therefore reject your accusation of cherry picking. Furthermore the author makes it clea ...[text shortened]... as all these larger earthquakes are able to be easily detected with fewer seismograph stations.
The report you cited did not address the likelihood that the differences from period to period are statistically significant.
In fact, the report you cite says this: " It is acknowledged that care and good judgement must be exercised in using global seismic data, as there may still be incomplete data from our sources even after 1901. "
I suppose it will not bother you that there may be natural causes for an increase. After all, Satan could be using nature against us.
Originally posted by DeepThoughthttps://www.newscientist.com/article-topic/earthquakes/
Since the prophesy is of the End of the World I don't think that that's a valid distinction. Sadly for you I'm good at details, your OP starts with the sentence: "In view of the tragic recent events in Japan and Ecuador are any of the doubters still insistent that we have not seen a marked increase in the frequency and magnitude of seismic activity as p ...[text shortened]... phesy is being fulfilled. You've made a prediction and are trying to weasel your way out of it.
==="Things happen at random – you can get clusters of earthquakes that might appear connected but actually they aren’t.” ===
Originally posted by JS357On the contrary it documented the differences for the period that is relevant to the composite sign of the last days that Jesus gave, that being the turn of the century to today, the term 'likelihood', I find is unscientific and speculative.
8.0 was your figure in the post I was replying to. Did you have data for 8.0?
The report you cited did not address the likelihood that the differences from period to period are statistically significant.
In fact, the report you cite says this: " It is acknowledged that care and good judgement must be exercised in using global seismic data, as there may ...[text shortened]... there may be natural causes for an increase. After all, Satan could be using nature against us.
Whether they occur as the natural consequence of the movement of tectonic plates or any other reason is not the issue, the frequency and magnitude is all that we are interested in. Satan using nature against us???? it appears to me that your use of stereotypes is not very helpful but if its something that you need to latch onto for comfort, so be it.
Originally posted by DeepThoughtThe prophecy is not about entirely about the end of the 'world' as you inaccurately and erroneously put it, its actually about the sign of Christs 'presence', Greek 'parousia' and a composite sign which would mark 'the beginning' of the end of the system. If you cannot get these details correct what hope is there for you? Perhaps you might be better actually reading Matthew chapter twenty four first don't you think?
Since the prophesy is of the End of the World I don't think that that's a valid distinction. Sadly for you I'm good at details, your OP starts with the sentence: "In view of the tragic recent events in Japan and Ecuador are any of the doubters still insistent that we have not seen a marked increase in the frequency and magnitude of seismic activity as p ...[text shortened]... phesy is being fulfilled. You've made a prediction and are trying to weasel your way out of it.
I have made not a single prediction and stating that I have evidence that a prophecy is being fulfilled is still not making a prediction in any shape or from and you are simply slobbering copious amounts of drool. Perhaps you might believe your own propaganda, but I dont, sorry.
Originally posted by finneganThen what are the other 'reasonable', interpretations that you make mention of concerning the time frame in which Christ intended his prophecy to be understood as understood by 'many', other 'good', Christians.
Many different interpretations have been made of biblical phrases, including the one you rely on, by people of undoubted Christian faith. I am not saying that your reading of the phrase is unreasonable but I am saying that it is only one of many reasonable ways to read it and many good Christians read it differenly to you.
For the data on earthquakes, o ...[text shortened]... in such situations. One cannot at the same time insist on being right and care about the truth.
19 Apr 16
Originally posted by yoctobyteIt's written by Michael Snyder. He says:
http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/56563-dozens-of-large-earthquakes-could-split-japan-s-southern-island
"If you are familiar with my work, then you already know that I believe that we have entered a period of time during which we will see seismic activity on a scale that none of us have ever experienced before. This great shaking will combine with other factors such as financial collapse, geopolitical instability and civil unrest to produce what many have described as a "perfect storm." Life as we know it is in the process of fundamentally changing, and right now we are only in the very early chapters of this change."
At the beginning of the text above he says "If you are familiar with my work..." When he says "my work", is he referring his work in geology and seismography?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieOhhh, the data is scientific!
Feel free to interpret the scientific data anyway you like.
Here's how the science would work. First, you compile reliable data (which is available since about the 1950s). Then you perform a rigorous statistical analysis, exploiting the fact that the frequency and magnitude of earthquakes is known to obey a power law distribution, allowing one to identify anomalous trends in their frequency and magnitude. Then you submit your findings for peer review, which exists for a reason.
Originally posted by KazetNagorraThe scientific data is well known and understood and demonstrates an accelerated trend in the frequency of earthquakes over a magnitude of 6.99 for the given period. You can either accept it or deny or explain it by any means necessary.
Ohhh, the data is scientific!
Here's how the science would work. First, you compile reliable data (which is available since about the 1950s). Then you perform a rigorous statistical analysis, exploiting the fact that the frequency and magnitude of earthquakes is known to obey a power law distribution, allowing one to identify anomalous trends ...[text shortened]... equency and magnitude. Then you submit your findings for peer review, which exists for a reason.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29601
19 Apr 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhy did such a sign of Christ's presence have to been an increase in earthquakes, and subsequently a large loss of life? Why couldn't his sign have been a noticeable increase in rainbows?
The prophecy is not about entirely about the end of the 'world' as you inaccurately and erroneously put it, its actually about the sign of Christs 'presence', Greek 'parousia' and a composite sign which would mark 'the beginning' of the end of the system. If you cannot get these details correct what hope is there for you? Perhaps you might be bette ...[text shortened]... ing copious amounts of drool. Perhaps you might believe your own propaganda, but I dont, sorry.
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeI cannot say just being a mere mortal although I suspect that if you are intent on portending the end of the system by some cataclysmic event rainbows is perhaps not the way to go.
Why did such a sign of Christ's presence have to been an increase in earthquakes, and subsequently a large loss of life? Why couldn't his sign have been a noticeable increase in rainbows?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYour questions is a time waster since we both know very well that Paul and the early Christians anticipated the imminent return of the Messiah, the probably insane author of Revelations certainly got into a froth over the prospect of avenging Nero's murderous treatment of Christians, and succeeding generations have produced an unending series of claims that it would be in the current generation.
Then what are the other 'reasonable', interpretations that you make mention of concerning the time frame in which Christ intended his prophecy to be understood as understood by 'many', other 'good', Christians.
Apocalyptic visions abound in European history and indeed have generated a fascinating strand in our art, of which the Douce Apocalypse might be given for a fine example, since I have a beautifully ilustrated book on this on a shelf just to my left (for the art), which includes a lengthy discussion of the role payed in mediaeval Christiantiy of the sort of prediction that you now imagine belongs to our own "epoch". Oddly, noone anticipated at that time that Jesus was referring to the 21st Century. It would have saved them a lot of worry and care.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Apocalypse_manuscripts
Now if you wish to debate the authenticity of the Christian faith of so many generations of visionaries and their followers then I am at a loss. All the evidence suggests that Christianity attracted fervant belief but maybe you will want to announce that true faith has only arrived on earth in our times, perhaps in a little town south of Glasgow? (Not even in America!)