posted
Like Mr. Squicky, I find this guy very interesting. Most modern "prophets" are vauge to to the point of obscurity, with little detail to pin them down on. This guy is very confident and specific about his facts.
quote: There was a big Gay Pride Parade going on in downtown Portland when the earthquake hit and buildings came tumbling down on all of those there. Portland was in total devastation. I’m not sure just how big the earthquake was but the number of 9.2 seems significant. There was also a major earthquake off the west coast that started a tsunami. Not too long after the quake in Portland, a wall of water from the collapse of the Bonneville Dam came rushing through Portland. A little while later another wall of water from the tsunami came up the Columbia River and it also came rushing through Portland.
The tsunami is important, because not only is the preacher talking about one very unlikely event, a very powerful earthquake, he's talking about several:
1)the 9.8 main quake
2)the dam breaking, sending a flood downstream to Portland
3)the off shore quake
4)the tsunami surging upstream through Portland
Sure, 1 causes 2 and 3 causes 4, but still. Has anyplace in recorded history had a devasting quake PLUS a powerful tsunami, on the same day? AFAIK, no.
Taken together, it's too unlikely for any rational person [except KoM, he gets a waiver] to call such a prediction, assuming it came true, a coincidence. It's all just too unlikely; Brother Day can be forgiven for being vauge about the magnitude when he has such specificity about the rest.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ron Lambert, yes, Portland is probably closer to Mt. Hood and more Dormant volcanos. However, if there is a big enough quake at Mt. St. Helens it can shockwave through the earth enough to end up as an effectively smaller magnitude quake all around the geographic location.
The 6.4 Big Bear Quake, (an aftershock to the larger Landers Quake) was felt with significant shaking, (I saw my brothers playing in the street, going up and down) over 200 miles away, and Mt St Helens is only about 100 miles from Portland.
posted
I would not call it a coincidence. Neither would I not necessarily call it 'inspired by the Christian God'. It could just as well be the Invisible Pink Unicorn.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
Of course I am making all this up just to play on unrelated superstitions, but them I'm evil like that.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: Has anyplace in recorded history had a devasting quake PLUS a powerful tsunami, on the same day?
Didn't a chunk of western Sumatra get flattened by the huge earthquake that caused the Boxing Day Tsunami... and then get washed out to sea by that tsunami?
Posts: 196 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If there is an earthquake of sufficient magnitude to collapse Bonneville Dam and lead to the flooding of some portions of Portland, that would seem to be close enough to specifications to count as a fulfillment. If it all occurs on June 18, the odds are pretty astronomical against it being sheer chance.
I have heard from RALovett on another forum (he lives in the Willamette Valley) that most of Portland is about 100 feet higher than the rivers that go through it, and he questions whether the collapse of Bonneville Dam would create a sufficiently high wall of water. As for the tsunami that also figures into the scenario, that is hard to figure, since it would seem to be unprecedented there.
Of course, Mt. Hood last erupted about 200 years ago, and Mt. St. Helens has a violent history in modern times, as most of us remember. After consulting a map, I would guess that Mt. St. Helens might be slightly closer to Portland, but Mt. Hood is closer to Bonneville Dam. Who knows what could be about to happen in the Cascadia subduction zone?
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would hate to profit from other people's misfortune. That's the same reason I refuse to participate in shorting stocks. (Shorting stocks should be illegal--it could provide a profit motive for people to engage in sabotage, so they could profit from shorting targeted stocks.)
Obviously I do not know if Pastor Day's dream prediction will come true. The odds are against it, surely. But it could happen, and I prefer to have an open mind. I thought it was worth letting other people know about the prediction, just in case. If I lived in the Willamette Valley, I would plan to be someplace safe--with my pets--on June 18. And no, I would not treat just any prediction with this kind of respect. Pastor Day seems respectable and sincere, credible enought to be taken seriously. Really, what would it hurt to plan a Sunday family outing for that day?
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank you for being kind enough to try and warn people, Mr. Lambert. Even though I am skeptical that the event will come to pass, I recognize that you believe that the possibilities may be different and are acting under that assumption. I think you should be saluted for your act of kindness in the face of the ridicule that I'm sure you knew was coming.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Please note that the group that Day represents is considered a cult by Christians and Jews both.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why Stephan, what makes them a cult? I'm not trying to set up an argument here, I'm just curious. My wife got told at work the other day by a customer(in great detail for about 10 minutes) that she belonged to a cult and unless she stopped reading the Book of Mormon and truly accepted Jesus, she was going to burn in hell.
I don't know anything about this group-perhaps they do some truly crazy Kool-Aid drinking mass suicide things. I just know I'm a little sensitive to cult references.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Crazy... Maybe the earthquake we've had predicted for around a decade and a half or so decided to move south.
Posts: 1158 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BaoQingTian: Why Stephan, what makes them a cult? I'm not trying to set up an argument here, I'm just curious. My wife got told at work the other day by a customer(in great detail for about 10 minutes) that she belonged to a cult and unless she stopped reading the Book of Mormon and truly accepted Jesus, she was going to burn in hell.
I don't know anything about this group-perhaps they do some truly crazy Kool-Aid drinking mass suicide things. I just know I'm a little sensitive to cult references.
I do realize that the term cult is rather broad, and I am defintitely not an expert on the matter. Being a cult is also not necessarily a bad thing.
When speaking of cults in negative terms, I have found them to share certain characteristics. They tend to take the central focus away from G-d. By anouncing himself a prohphet I think Day definitely qualifies.
Negative cults usually use deceitful recruitment methods. Interfaith Jewish and Christian councils have agreed that these Messianic Hebrew groups definitely do that. They also hide the fact that the majority of their members are not Jewish. They have also been found to target those with emotional needs, or pressure them from breaking all ties with friends and family that don't agree with their doctrine.
Do my above points include Mormonism? I personally don't think so. Is your church funded by other religions with ulterior motives? Doubtful. The Mormon missionaries I have encountered have all been very kind, and free of pressure. The few Mormons I have known, never broke ties with family or friends for not believing the same thing.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not personally worried about this particular event, though I am concerned about the possible devastating effects of a Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquake. I just don't think it'll happen on the day the guy predicts.
It's interesting that Day doesn't seem to be the typical "prophet" guy who just wants attention. I vote for well-meaning and probably delusional rather than a faker. Then again, he could just be very good at making himself seem sincere. Or I suppose he could be genuine. I'm not holding my breath, but at least we'll find out in a week and a half. My family's in the Willamette Valley, but I'm not going to worry.
Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
Websters Definition of a Cult: A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader. The followers of such a religion or sect. A system or community of religious worship and ritual.
I'm not Mormon, and really not even religious, but I would consider Mormonism to be in the stages of moving from a cult to a religion. I believe it did start with a charismatic leader, and it definately is/was considered to be false by many. As time goes by and it gains more believers and acceptance of others, I think it becomes more religion and less cult.
I do remember some sociology studies in college that referred to the Mormons as a cult and studied their recruitment methods. So there is some truth to the word cult, it just depends on how you define/view the word cult.
posted
They really need a new word for "negative cult" compared to the above definitions. Any religion could really be definied as a cult, by other religions.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yup. I really think of it as a religion that hasn't gotten big enough to be accepted by the general population yet.
Then there are the crazy cool-aid drinking cults. But they have their own built in problems with growth. They will never gain too many members before the alien ship flies over and tells them to drink their rat poison laced cool-aid.
Posts: 375 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
There is a three generation rule for cults: if a cult lasts more than three generations, then it's no longer a cult. Not universally accepted, of course.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks guys. The somewhat cynical reply that I've heard in the past when posing this question (in person) is that the difference between a religion and a cult is that a religion is bigger. I suspect that Judaism under Moses, early Christianity under Christ, and Islam under Mohammed (PBUH) would have been considered cults too. Small groups, charismatic leaders, considered radical or false by other groups at the time, etc.
What you posted made a lot of sense Stephan (in your reply right below Tom's). Thanks.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:There was a big Gay Pride Parade going on in downtown Portland when the earthquake hit
Interestingly, this is the point that makes the story the most unreal to me.
quote:If I speak up and nothing happens then I emerge as a false prophet
He does cover his bases, this guy.
quote:there were two men standing there.
I read this and thought "someone's been reading a lot of Lot recently."
You know what I think? I think this guy actually had this dream. I think he was caught up in the disaster of New Orleans, as he says at the beginning, and I think at the same time he was thinking about his dislike of homosexuality. Naturally, being a preacher, he would be very familiar with the story Sodom and Gomorrah, which would naturally be at the top of his mind in connection with these two things he obviously feels very concerned about.
In addition to the Gay Pride Parade and the wall of water is the hazy mention of men with guns- terrorists. Again, this is something that might come in connection with the two things, given what happened in New Orleans. (The fact that they fade back into the rubble and seem unconnected with anything else seems like the randomness of a dream to me.)
Okay, so think back to a vivid dream of yours, one that really seemed to be clear and meaningful. When you wake up, you would tend to remember it clearly. On top of that your brain tries to make sense of dream storylines- when you wake up an incomplete story can become complete simply because trying to infuse order into a story is a human thing to do.
Now imagine that you really feel very strongly about the images you see in a dream, like this guy. On top of that, your entire being during the daytime is full of talks about dreams from God and the truthfulness of them.
What would you do? Honestly, I think this guy actually had a dream. I think then he was so worried by this dream that he actually managed to continue his dream with the second "confirmation dream", curiously linked with the frustration of being unable to complete a cylindrical puzzle.
Add a little bit of delusionalness to him, a little bit of disconnect from reality and you get a man highly convinced by what he has dreamt one restless night.
Also: Notice the date was not provided in the dream, but by the man's own investigation in order to make sense of his dream. Already, he is adding in facts to a record of something that exists only in his brain.
Even more also: If God sent two "solid" angels to warn Lot, why not send "solid" angels (rather than dreams) to this guy? I guess applying logic to a being such as God is a bit complicated...
-------
Many people have said that if it does occur (which I think would be highly fascinating- way more fascinating than it not occuring, which is just boring) they would read the Bible more or reconsider their position.
I take quite the opposite viewpoint. I think that if there is a God and he's the kind of being who goes around drowning people because of homosexuality and other similar totally harmless so-called "sins"*, then I don't want anything to do with him even more than I do as an atheist.
*Let's not argue on this point. This is my opinion, not the beginning of a debate.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well if it means anything, most of us said that because we don't actually believe it will happen.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ooooh, I know, but I'm speaking purely on the most hypothetical level here. I didn't mean to be recriminating at all!
I clearly don't believe at all it will happen. I just like to imagine all the possible sides of something like this because I think far, far, too much.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Teshi: Ooooh, I know, but I'm speaking purely on the most hypothetical level here. I didn't mean to be recriminating at all!
I clearly don't believe at all it will happen. I just like to imagine all the possible sides of something like this because I think far, far, too much.
Oh I know, its fun to think about. Especially when work is slow.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Frankly I believe God is a much better marksman than this. Oooh, Joe sinned, so I am going to kill almost everyone in a 10 mile radius. Talk about your Overkill.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
This is the same god that drowned the entire earth, wiped out a generation of Egyptians with plagues and burning hail, and flattened whole cities with earthquakes and brimstone? Or am I thinking of somebody else?
Posts: 196 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm wondering what people will think if there is an earthquake, but it fails to rupture the dam. I'm also thinking the man does seem to be pretty unique these days.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
God also told Abraham that if there were ten righteous people in Sodom, He would spare Sodom. It could be that the only reason many of our cities are spared destruction is because there are faithful followers of God in them, to whom those who may ridicule them owe their very lives.
There is also mercy mixed with destructive judgments--no matter how great the disaster, usually some survive. We can always say, "It could have been worse."
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:God also told Abraham that if there were ten righteous people in Sodom, He would spare Sodom. It could be that the only reason many of our cities are spared destruction is because there are faithful followers of God in them, to whom those who may ridicule them owe their very lives.
I think you're confusing your terms there. Righteous doesn't equal faithful follower of God.
Considering the level morality shown by the mainstream Christians throughout the ages, I think it's entirely possible, accepting the "God will spare those surrounded by the righteous" postulate, that at some times the Christians owed their survival to the non-Christians that they were persecuting.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Teshi I agree. I've had some wierd-ass dreams, that take a hodgepodge of things in my life and lump them together and that sounded like a general weird ass dream.
I've also dwelled way too long trying to figure out what a few vivid dreams meant, and got myself into a peck of trouble doing so. My brain went into a recursive loop that it took a long time to get out of, and it wasn't a particularly healthy recursive loop.
posted
TrapperKeeper, I think both are true. Some things happen because it is God's will, and some things happen that are just the outworking of random chance. Note Ecclesiastes 9:11: "I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all."
As I view it, we as a race have told God to back off and give us space, and He has complied--then we complain whenever He allows something bad to happen.
And just because God might warn someone like Pastor Day when something bad is about to happen, does not necessarily mean He wishes for it to happen as a punitive judgment.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: God also told Abraham that if there were ten righteous people in Sodom, He would spare Sodom.
Which is a highly interesting assertion. Are you seriously proposing that there were no children in Sodom? Or perhaps, being sodomites in the literal sense of the term, the children were all equally guilty as their parents? I suggest that you think carefully before you answer; defending a genocide is not usually that easy.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: God also told Abraham that if there were ten righteous people in Sodom, He would spare Sodom.
Which is a highly interesting assertion. Are you seriously proposing that there were no children in Sodom? Or perhaps, being sodomites in the literal sense of the term, the children were all equally guilty as their parents? I suggest that you think carefully before you answer; defending a genocide is not usually that easy.
You could argue that the children had no chance at living good meaningful lives as the entire society was steeped in iniquity. It was an act of mercy to end their lives so as to spare them from such a disgustingly wicked upbringing.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Children who die before the moral age of accountability, in my opinion, will be saved.
But God has a right to kill anyone of us, child or not. He created us, His spirit sustains and maintains us, He knows us and expreriences with us everything we experience. Thus not only does He own us by right of creation, He must endure the intimate knowledge of our sin and suffering, rage and pain, from the inside out, despite having a nature that is perfectly pure and holy. At some point, He is entitled to say "Enough," and cease to bear the agony of enabling our sinful lives to continue any further.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Teshi: You could argue that but I think that the children would have rather a different opinion.
If you presented children with a vision of life in a hell hole, and life in a spirit world prepared by God, I dont think you would find many children hard pressed to choose between the two.
Not that I have little respect for children, but people make decisions that are in the childrens best intrests that go against childrens' perceived desires ALL the time.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:But God has a right to kill anyone of us...and cease to bear the agony of enabling our sinful lives to continue any further.
I don't buy into that kind of God. Well, technically, any kind of God, but hypothetically speaking...
If you create a race that is not only deeply flawed by has the capability to reason and think on its own, and you give them rules that are in many ways seemingly (or truly) irrational do you not expect them to question, change and break the rules?
Say I create my own miniature race and I set them loose in a world that I have built in my basement and I give them a somewhat obscure book containing rules like "Gold is an evil Devil-metal because it's soft. Don't use it." Sooner or later some bright spark is going to ask why this should be and he should come to the conclusion that it is completely irrational.
Now I may indeed have some legitimate reason why I gave this law but since I did not communicate my own reasons to my people they do not have all the information. There are two choices for them: some may decide to trust in my words, some may decide the book was written wrong, others will go the scientific rational route and start making their electrical units with gold because it conducts well.
Now, as a decent rational being myself I can't really fault those who chose the latter because demanding irrationality from a fairly rational people is cruel.
Once I have created my independent, rational race, do I have the right to murder them en masse, children included, to suit my own obscure whims? Do I have a divine right to squish intelligent beings when I feel like it? Does it make me merciful or good if I do?
No.
If I really, really wanted to save my miniature basement people I could actually help people by providing food to those who are starving and preventing terrible war and that sort of thing, not arbitrarily mass murdering people.
So my hypothetical take on this is that the God you describe is, basically, immoral and, as I've said before, I want nothing to do with him.
The second part of your statement I quoted talks about God being unable to bear our sins. Barring some long more reasonable explanation, this is God. God has, hypothetically and theoretically, the power to do create the universe; he has the power to bear or elimate pain, emotional or otherwise. After all, we humans go through it rather a lot.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BannaOj: I'm highly doubting that with a 9.2, the congregation would actually be far enough away not to be affected, and it would take most of Portland for sure. On the other hand given that they live so close to Mt St Hellens there might be good odds for a 2.9 quake that day...
AJ
There's a thought. Maybe his prophetic dreams were sent by a dislexic god?
Or possibly a dyslexic dog...
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The problem with your analogy is that God doesn't consider us "miniature basement people", but rather beings with our own will and responsible for our own actions.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:But God has a right to kill anyone of us...and cease to bear the agony of enabling our sinful lives to continue any further.
I don't buy into that kind of God. Well, technically, any kind of God, but hypothetically speaking...
If you create a race that is not only deeply flawed by has the capability to reason and think on its own, and you give them rules that are in many ways seemingly (or truly) irrational do you not expect them to question, change and break the rules?
Say I create my own miniature race and I set them loose in a world that I have built in my basement and I give them a somewhat obscure book containing rules like "Gold is an evil Devil-metal because it's soft. Don't use it." Sooner or later some bright spark is going to ask why this should be and he should come to the conclusion that it is completely irrational.
Now I may indeed have some legitimate reason why I gave this law but since I did not communicate my own reasons to my people they do not have all the information. There are two choices for them: some may decide to trust in my words, some may decide the book was written wrong, others will go the scientific rational route and start making their electrical units with gold because it conducts well.
Now, as a decent rational being myself I can't really fault those who chose the latter because demanding irrationality from a fairly rational people is cruel.
Once I have created my independent, rational race, do I have the right to murder them en masse, children included, to suit my own obscure whims? Do I have a divine right to squish intelligent beings when I feel like it? Does it make me merciful or good if I do?
No.
If I really, really wanted to save my miniature basement people I could actually help people by providing food to those who are starving and preventing terrible war and that sort of thing, not arbitrarily mass murdering people.
So my hypothetical take on this is that the God you describe is, basically, immoral and, as I've said before, I want nothing to do with him.
The second part of your statement I quoted talks about God being unable to bear our sins. Barring some long more reasonable explanation, this is God. God has, hypothetically and theoretically, the power to do create the universe; he has the power to bear or elimate pain, emotional or otherwise. After all, we humans go through it rather a lot.
there are eleventy billion flaws in your extended metaphor. Your first being that the ability to choose between good and evil is a "flaw."
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Teshi: Say I create my own miniature race and I set them loose in a world that I have built in my basement and I give them a somewhat obscure book containing rules like "Gold is an evil Devil-metal because it's soft. Don't use it." Sooner or later some bright spark is going to ask why this should be and he should come to the conclusion that it is completely irrational.
Now I may indeed have some legitimate reason why I gave this law but since I did not communicate my own reasons to my people they do not have all the information. There are two choices for them: some may decide to trust in my words, some may decide the book was written wrong, others will go the scientific rational route and start making their electrical units with gold because it conducts well.
Suppose you gave a bunch of really useful and civilized rules, but included some as well which didn't have obvious benefits, like the one against gold. And suppose you'd established to the satisfaction of every single one of the basement folk that you'd actually created them, so that they'd accepted that the one about gold must certainly have a reason, even if they weren't privy to it.
And then suppose a few generations later, you decided that being around all the time was really screwing with the ability of your basement folks to fulfill themselves, so you decided to take off and leave them to their own devices for a while. And during this vacation, some basement people who hadn't been born back when you'd proven yourself to their ancestors started demanding proof?
What would you do? Would you say, "Gosh, they're demanding proof. I should let that override my judgement that they need me to be gone right now and schedule a special engagement at the Basement Auditorium. Never mind the damage that'll do, and never mind the fact that many of them are actually managing just fine without me showing up."
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
