patrick.net

MarsAttacks! says

Yeah, this whole rapture thing is almost as stupid as some folks on p-net making predictions that the housing mess would all be better in 'just a couple of years'. (I've been reading some of the real old stuff on p-net and noticed that is exactly what happened)

Ack! Acck!

Well, they didn't specify which "couple of years." Maybe they're yet to be...

Bap33 says

folks, the last day of the Mayan long-count calendar is next Friday, 10/28/2011. Please do a search on Ian Lunguld on YouTube and watch his over-an-hour breakdown of the subject. It is really interesting.

Or, as an alternative you could do a YouTube search for what an actual astrophysicist, Neil deGrasse, has to say about the Mayan calendar. It is also very interesting.

Anyway, Bap I thought you were a christian? This Mayan calendar business seems very pagan cultish, and non-christian. Am I missing something?

I've prepared for the end of the world twice now, - and I gotta do it again? Puh-lease!

leoj707 says

Bap33 says

folks, the last day of the Mayan long-count calendar is next Friday, 10/28/2011. Please do a search on Ian Lunguld on YouTube and watch his over-an-hour breakdown of the subject. It is really interesting.

Or, as an alternative you could do a YouTube search for what an actual astrophysicist, Neil deGrasse, has to say about the Mayan calendar. It is also very interesting.

Anyway, Bap I thought you were a christian? This Mayan calendar business seems very pagan cultish, and non-christian. Am I missing something?

no no bro, you can read in the Bible that the world does end, and that the signs will be obvious. It's the exat time that is not known, and is not supposed to be our focus. One sign is when normal becomes odd, and the unseemly is encouraged. When up becomes down and so on. When that golden dome is knocked down and the Hebrews start building Solomons temple again, THEN it's almost time.

Caution: Rambling ahead!! Turn back now!!
I read the Tower of Bable story the first time at about 14 or 15 years old. It answered a question I had about why folks spoke so many different lingos. Those who talked the same lingo went and lived together and that resulted in a narrowed gene pool for a few thousand years. In about 5 more gens we should all be closer related and look about the same ... back where we started 7 to 10 thousand years ago. Cool huh?

Anyways, I believe the pyramids are left overs from the first set of humans that spoke the same lingo and were very advanced ... pre Noah's flood types, on a pre-flood Earth. The pre-flood Earth was a single large land mass with the area of Eqypt and the Mediteranian at the general middle. At that time the Earth's atmosphere was not the same. All of the fresh water that we now have was still wrapped around Earth in a large ice sheet in the upper atmosphere. This ice sheet defracted the sun and created the lush environment the Dino's enjoyed. It also made the Earth rotate extreemly slowly due to so much weight being so much farther from the axis. This extreemly slow Earth rotation explains why the time line for creation works out. If pre-flood Earth rotated 1/100,000,000,000,000,000 the speed it does now, then each day would allow for lots and lots of cellular changes.

When the flood happened it was the very first rain, but the rain is not what made the flood. The flood was due to major earth changes and upheaval caused by a very large asteroid impact near what is now called Mexico. It was during this upheaval and flood and rain that the continents slid apart and created the land that modern man has lived on since then. Ice ages, all of them, happened during this time of upheaval. Mass extintions, all of them, happened during this time too.

When Noah finally stepped from the Ark, it had been hundreds of years, and the first major change God made was to reduce the number of years a man lives. The sun would now come to Earth through clouds and water vapor, making a rainbow possible. That is the sign that God uses to promise man he wont flood Earth again. Next time, he takes us out with fire.

When modern man started getting advanced, God split them up by causing them to only understand and speak different lingos. By the looks of things today, I'd quess it was broke down between (examples) Arab, Latin, African, Asain, Nordic, Germanic, and Hebrew.

I like DeGrasse too, but his major flaw is in his failure to apply his astro reasoning to the mico side of things. The design, direction, weight, distance, timing, and reason for orbit of electrons in matter is still unexplained. Time, Space, Matter. Big issues. And, the guess work used in astro stuff pisses me off too. They guess what a planet is made up of by the color they see ... that's a big assed guess. But, like I said, NDT is one cool dude. His eaplaination of how our body composition matches the universes composition in relation to percentages of different molecules.

Ok, no more rambling! lol. gnite

Uhh, wow.

Bap33 says

that's a big assed guess

Don't you hate that ? Then again, it's infinitely more evidence than you have for all of your "historical" beliefs above.

"You can’t convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it’s based on a deep seated need to believe"

Carl Sagan

marcus says

"You can’t convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it’s based on a deep seated need to believe"

Carl Sagan

I call your Sagan quote, and raise you one deGrasse Tyson quote.

Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you.

-Neil deGrasse Tyson

Bap33 says

Anyways, I believe the pyramids are left overs from the first set of humans that spoke the same lingo and were very advanced ... pre Noah's flood types, on a pre-flood Earth. The pre-flood Earth was a single large land mass with the area of Eqypt and the Mediteranian at the general middle. At that time the Earth's atmosphere was not the same. All of the fresh water that we now have was still wrapped around Earth in a large ice sheet in the upper atmosphere. This ice sheet defracted the sun and created the lush environment the Dino's enjoyed. It also made the Earth rotate extreemly slowly due to so much weight being so much farther from the axis. This extreemly slow Earth rotation explains why the time line for creation works out. If pre-flood Earth rotated 1/100,000,000,000,000,000 the speed it does now, then each day would allow for lots and lots of cellular changes.

Wow, interesting to hear bizarre unsupportable retconning theories by fundamentalist nutjobs.

Of course, ice is less dense than water. :) That's why it floats. Did god make ice sink back then?

This is why it makes no sense that people think Mormons have bizarre beliefs. How is this crap any less bizarre?

The ice sheet was out in the upper atmosphere, not floating in a liqid ... it was way out there, like, where stuff orbits..... the Earth's orbit would be slower if you move the mass of water we have now on the surface and place it out in the upper orbit ..... and the ice was a solid sheet that incased the earth, and very thick ..... every drop of water that is part of the hydrological cycle came from outspace (a science "fact" if there is such a thing), so that is the cubic acres of water that was suspended in a sheet around Earth.... maybe!

Do you ever read much stuff besides lefty-loon marching orders? This is not MY theory, and is not a CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN theory, so you now have a bit of an issue -- yea? Who you gonna blame next?

Unsupportable theroy ... like, string theroy?

marcus says

Bap33 says

that's a big assed guess
Don't you hate that ?

yes, yes I do!! lol

Bap33 says

Do you ever read much stuff besides lefty-loon marching orders? This is not MY theory, and is not a CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN theory, so you now have a bit of an issue -- yea? Who you gonna blame next?

Unsupportable theroy ... like, string theroy?

Keep digging yourself a bigger hole, dude (above which you will be magically suspended due to the incredible theories of fundamentalist physics). You clearly don't understand the difference between a theory and a hypothesis, and can't tell the difference between those and religious belief.

We don't really need anymore pathetic ideologues who constantly resort to "left" or "liberal" or "socialist" instead of making a real argument, or even those pathetic ideologues who constantly refer to "right" or "conservative" instead of making a substantive argument for that matter. Evaluate ideas on their own merits instead of resorting to the lazy labeling. These labeling practices are used by lazy ignorant commenters who can't marshal facts and make good arguments, so instead they start calling people names.

Bap33 says

it was way out there, like, where stuff orbits.....

I think what you are talking about would require a lot of magic. If the earth was, for billions of years, encased in an ice "shell" --if I am understanding you properly-- a number of questions arise in my mind.

1. Is the collective mass of water on the earth significant enough to affect the rotation? (I am not even sure enough about the physics to know if the original postulation "works")

2. With that high of an "orbit" the ice would be exposed to solar winds and the vacuum of space. Comets "die" i.e. loose their ice usually after less than 2000 passes at the Sun. A large comet may last 10k passes. With the ice "shell" the Earth would be effectively a large comet in sustained orbit around the Sun. Would not all the earth's water boil off "quickly"?

3. Covered in a sublimating sheet of ice the moon and stars would probably not be visible.

4. I think a sheet of ice reflecting the suns rays, would not cause a "lush" environment but an ice age environment. Even our ground bases ice caps cause enough heat to be reflected back into space for the earth to be "cooled" a little bit.

5. And of course the magic required to push all this fresh water down to earth.

I am not a physicist or environmental scientist, but I can only imagine that there are probably dozens of catastrophes that would result from the earth being encased in an ice shell.

Bap33 says

This is not MY theory, and is not a CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN theory,

I did a quick google search, but nothing came up. Could you post a link to whose "theory" this is?

corntrollio says

I did a quick google search, but nothing came up. Could you post a link to whose "theory" this is?

The people who take the bible literally as the word of God sometimes have to work overtime to come up with a logical explanation of how it all could be true. Baps explanation above is a pretty spectacular example of this. Maybe it's what he goes with when he's in the mood to take the bible literally.

Silly really, because it wouldn't help one except some of the crazy specifics, such as all of the murder condoned in the bible, even while not killing is one of the 10 commandments.

I'm not arguing against the bible per se, to each their own, but it's easier for me to respect those who don't take it literally. And for that matter, those who know that hey, maybe a few things made it in to the book that really weren't divinely inspired, but rather were inspired more by efforts to control people and their behavior.

no, marcus, not murdering is a commandment .... killing is required at times. Murder is the bad one. Killing is just. You knew that, and chose your words in an effort to be a PITA ... but, no biggie. Silly, really.

The theroy is Hal Lindsey, of "Late Great Planet Earth" fame. Pretty cool stuff, but it really is just more "God of the gaps" (Neil D Tyson's phrase).

marcus says

maybe a few things made it in to the book that really weren't divinely inspired, but rather were inspired more by efforts to control people and their behavior.

sir, you do realize how many different writers -- and how far they were seperated in distance and time -- took part in creating the Old Test?? The New Test is a different animal all together, but the Old Test is pretty dang far reaching. That whole "controlling people" is not very far off the mark though .. so you get half-credit.

leo, good questions. I have no idea about most of that stuff, but I'll toss out some guesses: Maybe the ice was clearer than a prisym? Maybe the convex shape would result in a difference in the intensity? Maybe the Earth was much larger in diameter or much smaller is diameter while it was cooling off? Maybe our eliptical orbit around the sun was not where and how it is now? Maybe the sun was hotter or colder while the universe was forming? Maybe the internal heat from the earth's core was radiating large amounts of heat that was trapped by the ice? I'm thinking that - if Adam and Eve were designed to live forever, then the climate and such would need to be perfect for human life. Maybe it was perfect for human life before the great flood and earth changes?

corn,
you are not being much fun at all. you must need a hug. I am not preaching anything here dude, just sharing some long shot ideas. Today's science will be laughed at one day, just like you laugh at the medical science of the 14th century. Quit thinking this generation's science group is anything special.

oh, and the moon could have been encased in the ice too.

and the magic that made the ice melt is called heat and then the falling water, called rain, fell to Earth due to gravity. Nobody knows why there is gravity, or why there is orbit, or why there is axis rotation. Or, why there is orbits of systems around a large center of nothingness .... There is even a THEROY that magnatisim is a result of the rotation of a liquid iron core inside of Earth ... there is not one single portion of physical evidence of whatever is inside the Earth, or what it is made of, and there sure as hell is no way to know what the surface or core of any planet or start is made of ... but. there are lots and lots of guesses.

Pretty neat stuff, in my opinion. I like NOVA.

Bap33 says

no, marcus, not murdering is a commandment .... killing is required at times. Murder is the bad one. Killing is just.

Not to wade into a religious debate, but those statements strike me as a bit self serving. Who decides if a killing is "just"? Or if it's murder? The guy who did the killing?

Bap33 says

Killing is just. You knew that, and chose your words in an effort to be a PITA

No actually I think there is some weird stuff in the bible. Most people know not to take it literally. I guess it's okay just to take the things you want to take literally, and disregard the rest (kidding).

http://www.evilbible.com/Murder.htm

Considering we're all gonna die (again) on Friday, we should have a collective hug and wish each other the best.

Let's bring this up again on Saturday, when we discover that we didn't die.

elliemae says

Considering we're all gonna die (again) on Friday, we should have a collective hug and wish each other the best.

I plan to CLEANSE myself on Thursday, to prepare.

I heard a rumor they went off the air abruptly.

So either
1) they went bankrupt
2) they want to perpetuate the "world is ending" notion and took themselves off the air as part of some larger plan.
2) they were in fact raptured [that would explain the sudden increase in missing person reports over past few days :)].

To each their own... FWIW - some of the stuff they broadcast wasn't all that bad - even if I don't agree with their theology. Certainly it was better (and more enlightening) than some of the secular junk out there today.

elliemae says

Let's bring this up again on Saturday, when we discover that we didn't die.

Good point. Besides that web page far more anti Christian than I am. I just was trying to make he point that the bible can't be taken literally.

tatupu70 says

Bap33 says

no, marcus, not murdering is a commandment .... killing is required at times. Murder is the bad one. Killing is just.

Not to wade into a religous debate, but those statements strike me as a bit self serving. Who decides if a killing is "just"? Or if it's murder? The guy who did the killing?

The same guy that picks how much is rich does it ..... or maybe the guy that picks how much of a particular "race" a person must be to qualify for the protection offered to "protected" classes of people does it .... just kidding.

Here is a simple example:
Killing a baby in the womb by inserting a vacuum into the mom and sucking out the baby is murber of the baby.

Shooting an intruder as he gets off your dead wife's body is a justified killing.

Shooting a cow to eat it is killing.
Shooting a deer to stuff it is murder.

Excellent! Now I can sell more rapture insurance.

Oh wait, that day has already passed. Damn it. Now I'm going to have to do something productive for a living. I should have been a banker.

Doesn't that guy realize that your supposed to make the end of the world a date so far in the future, that you won't be proven wrong in your lifetime? Oh, wait, he did.

He must have thought he'd be dead before being disproven.

Bap33 says

Killing a baby in the womb by inserting a vacuum into the mom and sucking out the baby is murber of the baby.

Down with baby murberers. And down with tossing abortion into a discussion about this topic. We get it, you're against it. Either that or you've created a new class of "killers," the "murberers."

Quote: Camping says God held off Saturday out of mercy: He did not want man to suffer for five months

Yeah, that merciful prick of a god that's going to kill every man, woman, child, baby, puppy, and kitten on the Earth. He's a real sweetheart.

Vicente says

I plan to CLEANSE myself on Thursday, to prepare.

Thank you for choosing that picture and not this one.

Now this is living. It's good to be king.

elliemae says

Bap33 says

Killing a baby in the womb by inserting a vacuum into the mom and sucking out the baby is murber of the baby.

Down with baby murberers. And down with tossing abortion into a discussion about this topic. We get it, you're against it. Either that or you've created a new class of "killers," the "murberers."

Eschew Obfuscation

I am against all murders .... and so are most people ... and the law is too. ... well, except a few.

I'll try a few more examples sans baby murder mention:
The Americans on the 9/11 planes, and the American victims on the ground, were all murdered.
Suddam Hussain was killed.

In WW2 the Jews were murdered.
The liberation of europe saw many Jew murdering Nazi killed by Allied forces.

Bap33 says

The liberation of europe saw many Jew murdering Nazi killed by Allied forces.

OK then, how about the young Germans drafted into the war that didn't really want to be there and certainly didn't kill any Jews. Was that murder? or killing.

Or the guy who raped your wife and got off on a technicality in court. When you kill him is it murder? or killing?

"Certainly there is no hunting like the hunting of man and those who have hunted armed men long enough and liked it, never really care for anything else thereafter."

It is really a sport more than anything else.

tatupu, answer your own questions first, please, and then I'll give my opinion.

Bap33 says

Shooting an intruder as he gets off your dead wife's body is a justified killing.

So, maybe the intruder walked into your house by mistake because his was repossessed and he was looking for a place to rest his weary head.

Meanwhile, your wife gets out of bed and, it being cold outside, puts on new socks. They slip on the floor that your teenage daughter cleaned with too much floor cleaner (you know kids, she was probably on restriction and figured if she cleaned it would go a long way toward getting her phone back and resuming her pattern of going to the mall and texting the friends who are also in the food court at another table...)

So the wife slips, hits her head on the corner of the counter that is too sharp and she's asked you to fix multiple times. She's laying there, bleeding, when the intruder walks in the front door that was left unlocked when your teenage daughter snuck out and took the car (got caught because she put too much gas back in)... and he falls over her lifeless body.

Covered in blood, he's discovered laying on her dead, lifeless body that possesses no signs of life and couldn't possibly be revived (I know, redundant, repetetive and says the same thing over & over...).

Then it's discovered that he's a Nazi soldier who was forced to enlist... and he's entered a time vortex with a little door that only an unborn baby can sucked thru with a vacuum... and you're stuck with a nazi soldier who merely tried to get warm (mission accomplished, btw)

"Would that then be a sin then, Father?"

Bap33 says

Here is a simple example:
Killing a baby in the womb by inserting a vacuum into the mom and sucking out the baby is murber of the baby.

No.

Shooting an intruder as he gets off your dead wife's body is a justified killing.

No.

Shooting a cow to eat it is killing.

Yes.

Shooting a deer to stuff it is murder.

No.

Let me explain:

As we know the bible has been transliterated --the 10 commandments at least-- from the Hebrew. These days it is quite easy to check on the Hebrew of the 10 commandments and see what was original intended.

http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Scripture/Torah/Ten_Cmds/Sixth_Cmd/sixth_cmd.html

The Jewish sages note that the word retsach applies only to illegal killing (e.g., premeditated murder or manslaughter) - and is never used in the administration of justice or for killing in war. Hence the KJV translation as "thou shalt not kill" is too broad.

So, the translation of the 10 commandments should have said "thou shalt not illegally kill".

If the intruder was to throw up their hands and give up, it would be illegal to kill them, and you could possibly spend time in jail and you would be in violation of the 10 commandments.

It is legal to abort a fetus, stuff a deer, and eat a cow so all are OK by the 10 commandments.

Buy, once can cherry-pick anyway they wish.

lol ... just because some curupt deviant lawyer was able to get some curupt deviant judge to change the law, does not change what the Word of God commanded. Jesus did not remove the law, he completed it.

Intruders can be and are shot.

elective abortion is murder.

Still waiting for Tatupu.

@ellie, lmao.

Bap33 says

lol ... just because some curupt deviant lawyer was able to get some curupt deviant judge to change the law, does not change what the Word of God commanded.

Umm... no, but god's law says that only illegal "kills" are prohibited, who are you to question god's law? Do you think that when god said the rule only applied to illegal kills, he would not foresee our current legal system?

Bap33 says

Intruders can be and are shot.

No, it is not always legal to shoot anyone you feel is "intruding" in your home. At least when I got my California CCW that is what they taught, perhaps in other states it is perfectly legal to shoot anyone you don't want in your home. *this is not legal advice, please consult with your lawyer before shooting people in your house*

Bap33 says

elective abortion is murder.

Not according to the law, and according to god's law only illegal killing is prohibited.

Bap--

Sorry, I meant to reply earlier.

I tend to agree with other posters that the law has to be the deciding factor. Otherwise, it's a very slippery slope.

Bap33 says

elective abortion is murder

Even if it's early and just a few cells ?

Why is it that I don't know that it's a human life yet and you do ? The bible doesn't clearly address when a human becomes a human or when it gets it's soul.

If a healthy young woman decided she wanted to have a child, and her husband said no, and got a vasectomy, why wouldn't that be murder ? He consciously chose not to cause a potential life to come in to existence.

What if your political philosophy wins out, and the plutocracy gains far more ground, enslaving the population to where life is TERRIBLE a couple hundred years from now for most people. Terribly polluted. Terrible slave labor conditions. HIgh levels of misery, despair, pain and suffering. IF a woman then decided to abort her zygote out of a feeling of compassion that she didn't want to bring a child into such a terrible life, would it be murder even then ?

(ps: there are people with conditions - including genetic, family history, drug involvement. or associations with bad people and so on, that could feel this way now)

tatupu, please answer your questions.

Leo, please say what murder is. And Leo, you do realize that all the laws you want to use to define what the 10Cs say came after the 10Cs, right? Wrong order aint it?

marcus, please allow me to wait for these two others to respond, and then I will respond to your points, as they all will tie together. Thanks.

Bap33 says

tatupu, please answer your questions

I did. Did you miss is?

tatupu70 says

I tend to agree with other posters that the law has to be the deciding factor. Otherwise, it's a very slippery slope.