Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,821 Year: 3,078/9,624 Month: 923/1,588 Week: 106/223 Day: 4/13 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The moons, eclipses, and timing
Calypsis4
Member (Idle past 5214 days)
Posts: 428
Joined: 09-29-2009


Message 31 of 112 (529738)
10-10-2009 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Coyote
10-09-2009 8:46 PM


Re: Serious subjects
Sounds fair.
Please post a serious post dealing with a serious subject.
It would be a nice change
Coyote, you blew it. I will say again what I said last night: we are talking about the evidence for the most important event in the history of mankind (the death of Christ on the cross) which is born up by a multitude of evidences, historical testimonies, and natural phenomena that occurred as was foretold, but you treat the subject like trash.
By the way: This is October 10, 2009 A.D. What does 'A.D.' stand for? For that matter what does 'B.C.' stand for?
You no longer exist as far as I am concerned.
"The fool hath said in his heart, 'there is no god'." [thumb=300]http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h106/Martyrs5/Science__Society_10425710-1.jpg[/thumb=300]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Coyote, posted 10-09-2009 8:46 PM Coyote has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by mark24, posted 10-10-2009 10:22 AM Calypsis4 has replied
 Message 35 by NosyNed, posted 10-10-2009 10:56 AM Calypsis4 has not replied
 Message 36 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 10-10-2009 11:07 AM Calypsis4 has not replied
 Message 39 by bluescat48, posted 10-10-2009 11:50 AM Calypsis4 has not replied
 Message 44 by Theodoric, posted 10-11-2009 1:17 PM Calypsis4 has not replied

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 5196 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 32 of 112 (529739)
10-10-2009 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by Calypsis4
10-10-2009 10:03 AM


So either behave at least like a semi-professional or don't even bother.
But I'm not a semi-professional...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Calypsis4, posted 10-10-2009 10:03 AM Calypsis4 has not replied

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 5196 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 33 of 112 (529742)
10-10-2009 10:22 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by Calypsis4
10-10-2009 10:17 AM


Re: Serious subjects
Calypsis,
we are talking about the evidence for the most important event in the history of mankind (the death of Christ on the cross) which is born up by a multitude of evidences, historical testimonies, and natural phenomena that occurred as was foretold, but you treat the subject like trash.
Just to be clear, are you saying there was a lunar or solar eclipse in AD33?
And what is your evidence that Jesus died in AD33?
Mark
Edited by mark24, : No reason given.

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Calypsis4, posted 10-10-2009 10:17 AM Calypsis4 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Calypsis4, posted 10-10-2009 10:51 AM mark24 has replied
 Message 38 by Modulous, posted 10-10-2009 11:38 AM mark24 has not replied
 Message 42 by anglagard, posted 10-11-2009 5:16 AM mark24 has replied

  
Calypsis4
Member (Idle past 5214 days)
Posts: 428
Joined: 09-29-2009


Message 34 of 112 (529748)
10-10-2009 10:51 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by mark24
10-10-2009 10:22 AM


Re: Serious subjects
Just to be clear, are you saying there was a lunar or solar eclipse in AD33?
You're right. You're not only not a 'semi-professionl' but you haven't learned to read carefully yet. Go back and read the topic post for your answer.
And what is your evidence that Jesus died in AD33?
Perhaps I am wrong. Perhaps it was based on the birth of Madylyn Murray O'Hare?
Bye.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by mark24, posted 10-10-2009 10:22 AM mark24 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by mark24, posted 10-10-2009 2:20 PM Calypsis4 has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 35 of 112 (529750)
10-10-2009 10:56 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by Calypsis4
10-10-2009 10:17 AM


Re: Serious subjects
By the way: This is October 10, 2009 A.D. What does 'A.D.' stand for? For that matter what does 'B.C.' stand for?
What they do not stand for is the correct number of years since the alleged birth of Christ. That the dates are off by a small number of years has been know for a long time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Calypsis4, posted 10-10-2009 10:17 AM Calypsis4 has not replied

  
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3102 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


(1)
Message 36 of 112 (529756)
10-10-2009 11:07 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by Calypsis4
10-10-2009 10:17 AM


Re: Serious subjects
Calypsis writes:
By the way: This is October 10, 2009 A.D. What does 'A.D.' stand for? For that matter what does 'B.C.' stand for?
And the days of the week and months of the year are named after old Norse, Germanic and Greco-Roman gods and goddesses. What is your point?
Just because we use the terms BC (Before Christ) and AD (Anno Domini) as adopted from the Gregorian calendar does not prove the existence of Jesus Christ any more than our adoption of the days of the week and months of the year prove the existence of the Greco-Roman and Germanic/Norse pantheon of gods and goddesses.
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

"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
"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Calypsis4, posted 10-10-2009 10:17 AM Calypsis4 has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 37 of 112 (529760)
10-10-2009 11:31 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Granny Magda
10-09-2009 6:15 PM


Re: Spoiler
Well that's a book ruined for me now!
Makes you wonder why people read it more than once if you know what happens, neh?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Granny Magda, posted 10-09-2009 6:15 PM Granny Magda has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 38 of 112 (529763)
10-10-2009 11:38 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by mark24
10-10-2009 10:22 AM


A lunar eclipse...at Easter....shocking!
There was a partial lunar eclipse visible mostly from the Atlantic Ocean during Passover 33AD.
And 32AD (A total lunar eclipse visible from the Middle east)
And 31AD (partial visible from Pacific Ocean)
And 34AD (Penumbral/Pacific)
And 42AD (partial/middle east)*
Of course - a partial lunar eclipse during Passover isn't remotely miraculous being as it always falls on a full moon. A solar eclipse would have been far more interesting!


*Eclipse data
Easter calculator
Calculations for these dates may be slightly inaccurate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by mark24, posted 10-10-2009 10:22 AM mark24 has not replied

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4190 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 39 of 112 (529765)
10-10-2009 11:50 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by Calypsis4
10-10-2009 10:17 AM


Re: Serious subjects
Coyote, you blew it. I will say again what I said last night: we are talking about the evidence for the most important event in the history of mankind (the death of Christ on the cross)
Maybe for Christians but not for Jews, Muslems, Buddhists, Hindus, Confucianists Taoists Shintoists, animists, atheists or those holding any other belief. There is not even a total belief , even among Christians, as to when your alleged savior was crucified.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Calypsis4, posted 10-10-2009 10:17 AM Calypsis4 has not replied

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 5196 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 40 of 112 (529789)
10-10-2009 2:20 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Calypsis4
10-10-2009 10:51 AM


Re: Serious subjects
Calypsis,
You're right. You're not only not a 'semi-professionl' but you haven't learned to read carefully yet. Go back and read the topic post for your answer.
Well, I did, you seem to be talking about both. So please confirm which, or indeed both.
Anyway, what's professionalism got to do with your OP's ambiguity?
Perhaps it was based on the birth of Madylyn Murray O'Hare?
Makes no sense to me, please can you elaborate on why this is evidence of Jesus' death being in AD33, or whenever? A more professional answer please, at least try to meet your own standards.
Mark

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Calypsis4, posted 10-10-2009 10:51 AM Calypsis4 has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 735 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 41 of 112 (529879)
10-10-2009 10:00 PM


Question for Calypsis
Cal, what sort of event caused this darkening of the sun in 33 AD? I don't regard "the will of God" as much of an answer. You're welcome to use that as a part of your answer, but please, oh please, gimme a plausible physical mechanism if you have one.

"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Calypsis4, posted 10-12-2009 6:23 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 837 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 42 of 112 (529922)
10-11-2009 5:16 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by mark24
10-10-2009 10:22 AM


Re: Serious subjects
When it comes to solar, here is the nearest I can find to any Passover of 33 AD.
NASA - Total Solar Eclipse of 29 November 24
At November 24, 29 AD it is off by four years, off by 9 months, off by around 300km. Still interestingly close, provided no declaration of personal infallibility and/or absolute literalism in Biblical interpretation.
{Personal note: although this thread is from Calypsis 4 and I stated I would not engage in any thread in which he/she/it was involved, I hereby revise such a declaration as premature when concerning statements that may add to the debate when concerning possibly overlooked matters of fact and if addressed to other members. As to Calypsis 4 or any other poop-flingers, I'm sure other more interested parties can handle that better than I am prepared to do as I am tired of making my contributions to this forum too negative for my personal taste.}

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by mark24, posted 10-10-2009 10:22 AM mark24 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by mark24, posted 10-11-2009 6:30 AM anglagard has not replied
 Message 45 by Calypsis4, posted 10-12-2009 6:19 PM anglagard has not replied

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 5196 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 43 of 112 (529926)
10-11-2009 6:30 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by anglagard
10-11-2009 5:16 AM


Re: Serious subjects
Thanks, anglagard, just wondering what all the sky darkening is in the OP.

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by anglagard, posted 10-11-2009 5:16 AM anglagard has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Calypsis4, posted 10-12-2009 6:20 PM mark24 has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 44 of 112 (529978)
10-11-2009 1:17 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by Calypsis4
10-10-2009 10:17 AM


Re: Serious subjects
Actually the correct way of dating now is CE and BCE. Since the dating actually does not coincide with anything the terms AD and BC have fallen out of favour.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Calypsis4, posted 10-10-2009 10:17 AM Calypsis4 has not replied

  
Calypsis4
Member (Idle past 5214 days)
Posts: 428
Joined: 09-29-2009


Message 45 of 112 (530235)
10-12-2009 6:19 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by anglagard
10-11-2009 5:16 AM


Re: Serious subjects
When it comes to solar, here is the nearest I can find to any Passover of 33 AD.
Anglagard, you just made a fool of yourself. It appears that you didn’t even bother to check out the source I provided at the end of the topic post.
I said nothing about a solar eclipse and your date of Nov. 24, A.D. 29 is four years off.
But since you didn’t notice it then let me lead you by the hand to the place where NASA notes the date of the death of Christ on the (gasp!) lunar eclipse of April 3, A.D. 33.
NASA - Lunar Eclipses of History
Now if you will just take the time to scroll down to the second section of dates as it concerns the period A.D. you will find on the second notation 0033 Apr 03 as it concerns the crucifixion of Christ.
It helps if skeptics like you would give more than a cursory examination of the facts that are given them by Christians, but of course I understand your prejudice against what we believe in and it hurts you to discover substantive truth as it regards scripture. Nonetheless I provided in the O.P. documentation of the foretelling of the event by the prophets, the natural phenomena that occurred on that day as observed by those who saw it, the confirmation of historians who were contemporary with Christ at that time, and the computer analysis from NASA that the lunar eclipse happened on the day appointed. That, my skeptical counterpart, is four lines of evidence. There aren’t many historical events in the history of the world that have that many sources of confirmation.
As to Calypsis 4 or any other poop-flingers
I get you. Don't post me again, fella.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by anglagard, posted 10-11-2009 5:16 AM anglagard has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Coragyps, posted 10-12-2009 6:43 PM Calypsis4 has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024