2012

This is a discussion on 2012 within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; Perhaps they meant the swine flu (expect it to get serious in a couple of years)?...

  1. #46
    The larch
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,573
    Perhaps they meant the swine flu (expect it to get serious in a couple of years)?
    I might be wrong.

    Thank you, anon. You sure know how to recognize different types of trees from quite a long way away.
    Quoted more than 1000 times (I hope).

  2. #47
    Malum in se abachler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,189
    Quote Originally Posted by anon View Post
    Perhaps they meant the swine flu (expect it to get serious in a couple of years)?
    It's meaningless, pigs are naturally part of the flu vector, they always have been along with birds. This strain is no different. People die of the flu every year, the numbers are no higher now than they have ever been, its just the latest shockertainment masquerading as 'news'.
    Until you can build a working general purpose reprogrammable computer out of basic components from radio shack, you are not fit to call yourself a programmer in my presence. This is cwhizard, signing off.

  3. #48
    l'Anziano DavidP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Plano, Texas, United States
    Posts
    2,738
    >More than that, it's just a repeat of that 40+page "God" thread we had on here once.

    Ahhh...memories I love those heated debates we get into, even though they absolutely go nowhere

    From a Christian (and Mormon) perspective, I don't deny that the year 2012 could be significant in some way, but I definitely do not believe that it's the year in which the apocalypse will occur (as I stated in my previous post).

    Christian belief is clear on the matter and can be found in Matthew 24:42-44 and 1 Thessalonians 5:1-4. It states the day will come as a "thief in the night" and "no man knoweth". Although we might all have our estimates (and who knows how good the year 2012 is as an estimate), I don't think any of us know the exact time or day, and thus I do not believe 2012 has any substance as a date for the apocalypse.

    It is true that it will be the start of a new 400 year baktun cycle on the Maya calendar. That is significant. It could mean other things too...things that I don't know because I have not extensively studied the Maya, but I don't find any evidence for an apocalyptic event.
    My Website

    "Circular logic is good because it is."

  4. #49
    The Right Honourable psychopath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Where circles begin.
    Posts
    1,070
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidP
    but I don't find any evidence for an apocalyptic event
    But it'd be pretty neat though, don't you think? I mean, witnessing the end of the world is a pretty once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.
    Memorial University of Newfoundland
    Computer Science

    Mac and OpenGL evangelist.

  5. #50
    Devil's Advocate SlyMaelstrom's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Out of scope
    Posts
    4,077
    Quote Originally Posted by psychopath View Post
    But it'd be pretty neat though, don't you think? I mean, witnessing the end of the world is a pretty once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.
    Patton Oswalt beat us to this bit by several years now.
    Sent from my iPadŽ

  6. #51
    The larch
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,573
    Christian belief is clear on the matter and can be found in Matthew 24:42-44 and 1 Thessalonians 5:1-4. It states the day will come as a "thief in the night" and "no man knoweth".
    It is curious that in Matthew 24:34, at the beginning of the same story, it says: "I tell you the truth, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place."

    I also looked at the comments at bible.org, and they seem to miss the rather obvious interpretation that the author of the parable really thought that Jesus will come very-very soon...

    In any case, the Christian belief is not clear and it is all a matter of reinterpretation in different ages in the light of new "evidence" (the He didn't come as previously expected).
    Last edited by anon; 04-30-2009 at 04:55 PM.
    I might be wrong.

    Thank you, anon. You sure know how to recognize different types of trees from quite a long way away.
    Quoted more than 1000 times (I hope).

  7. #52
    l'Anziano DavidP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Plano, Texas, United States
    Posts
    2,738
    But it'd be pretty neat though, don't you think? I mean, witnessing the end of the world is a pretty once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.
    That's true.

    It is curious that in Matthew 24:34, at the beginning of the same story, it says: "I tell you the truth, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place."

    I also looked at the comments at bible.org, and they seem to miss the rather obvious interpretation that the author of the parable really thought that Jesus will come very-very soon...
    That's actually true that most ancient Christians did think the "second coming" would happen very quickly after Jesus' ascension. I definitely do not dispute that. However there are points in the Bible that show us that the leadership tried to warn the people that it might not be quite as quick as they thought, namely in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-5 and also the entire Book of Revelation.
    My Website

    "Circular logic is good because it is."

  8. #53
    Super Moderator VirtualAce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    9,598
    The second coming is really only referred to as happening in the last days. Essentially any time after Christ's death is considered the last days. So all references related to the last days mean the time after Christ. Other than that there is no time mentioned except for the mentioning of Israel gaining back its land in which the generation that sees that shall not pass and will see the second coming. Some scholar believe that is referring to when Israel regained its territory in the six day war back in 1976? or 1974? My history is a bit rusty so forgive me.

    The last days church began with the Apostles and Acts is a distinct representation of the last days church. However, shortly after Pentecost (or the feast of weeks), the 'then' church would not separate and stayed primarily in Jerusalem which is not what was intended. Due to this the diaspora or separation of the Jews occurred.

    The only thing you can say about the second coming in the context of a believer is that each day is does not happen is one more closer to when it will. The Bible is extremely clear on false prophets in the last days who will attempt to predict the end and yet will be incorrect. It warns believers to beware of those who attempt to do so and to resist the temptation to put a date on the event. Jesus also makes reference to this when he says that a generation will 'seek a sign and yet no sign will be given to it'. I believe this reference is in Matthew. It may also be in Mark but worded a bit differently. According to the Bible even Jesus himself does not know the day nor the hour and only the Father (meaning God in the context) knows the time.

    When it comes to interpreting the text you must take into account the culture of the day, the meaning of the words to the original audience, and the application of the truth as it pertains to the idealogies of the day, as well as historical context and a host of other considerations. A fundamental concept upon which all Biblical hermenuetics is based is that a text can never mean to you and I what it could have never meant to its original audience. Essentially no Bibilical text, and I would argue no text Biblical or not, can be interpreted correctly without taking into account many considerations surrounding the writing of the text. I had several classes where we had to do the etymology of a word which was not fun in any sense of the word and was quite complex.

    It is imperative when interpreting bibilical texts that they be taken in context. Ideas and concepts are pulled out of the text rather than ideas and concepts being forced into the text (exegesis as opposed to isogesis). Unfortunately many have chosen isogesis because they can twist the text to fit any world view they want it to. However this is an incorrect interpretation of Biblical text and is not considered a scholarly interpretation nor should it be trusted. Often isogesis is also chosen because it is easier and requires less support since you are basically just 'spinning' supporting scriptures to support your incorrect interpretation. Out of context the entire Bible has absolutely no meaning. Exegesis is extremely time consuming and difficult. I had many classes related to the idea of 'exhausting the passage'. Essentially you drill down as far as you can go given the information you can find and then build up from there. I wrote 18 pages on a couple verses of Scripture and still did not give it the treatment it needed. Obviously for a church setting this is far too detailed for people to enjoy or rememeber so you have to find a way to get the message across without diving down quite as deep. However the different approaches to teaching/preaching are far beyond the scope of this post.

    You can find more information about Biblical interpretation here:
    Hermeneutics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The area of study in herm I'm talking about is the interpretation of Biblical texts. If you are not well studied in this area then absolute correct interpretation of the texts is difficult at best. Of course newer Bibles are written and interpreted into modern languages by teams of Biblical scholars and are much easier to read. However I was warned that attempting to do an in-depth study out of an NIV or perhaps a paraphrased Bible version was probably not wise. Second best is to use the KJV, NKJV or NASB (NASB is actually more correct than a true KJV - NKJV is closer to NASB) and absolute best is to use the original Greek and Hebrew texts. I was never able to take Hebrew or Greek for my degree so I normally pulled my studies from KJV's and usually taught from NKJV's (the language was friendlier for a group setting). I then verified my conclusions using commentaries on scripture written by scholars who had forgotten more about the Bible than I ever knew. If my interpretation of the text somehow did not agree with what the commentary said I normally researched at least 5 to 6 more commentaries to see if there was a debate on the issue. If there was then I decided which side I would support most based on what I knew of the Bible and if there was no debate then I had to accept that my interpretation of the text was just simply incorrect and based on a lack of sufficient knowledge about the historical context, style of the author, etc. surrounding the text. If I chose one side of a hotly debated topic I made it extremely clear in my messages and teachings that there was a debate and the version I was teaching was merely my opinion of what was correct. I would then encourage people to research on their own to see what their personal take on the issue was. Often I would present both sides and then allow my audience to decide for themselves. Most issues in theology are not completely this or that and have many facets to them. However as a leader of a group you are often forced to 'have the answers' and so you must decide which approach to take and/or which side of an issue to stand on. You, however, are not required to force your opinion onto your congregation but sadly I have seen this done many many times on issues that are just not all that clear in the Bible.
    Last edited by VirtualAce; 05-01-2009 at 06:20 PM.

  9. #54
    Malum in se abachler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,189
    I was under the impression that anyone with functional reading skills could read the KJV, but it isnt a legitimate interpretation for biblical (historical) research as it is also subject to honest misinterpretations, hence the reliance on the dead sea scrolls as a (mostly) unadulterated source. This of course all falls back on the notion that stone age people 'had it all figured out' and that we are just a bunch of dumbasses since then.
    Until you can build a working general purpose reprogrammable computer out of basic components from radio shack, you are not fit to call yourself a programmer in my presence. This is cwhizard, signing off.

  10. #55
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    903
    Quote Originally Posted by abachler View Post
    It's meaningless, pigs are naturally part of the flu vector, they always have been along with birds. This strain is no different. People die of the flu every year, the numbers are no higher now than they have ever been, its just the latest shockertainment masquerading as 'news'.
    Expert says 'just another flu virus,' so why the fear?

    It seems you're mostly right. That's what I thought as well. There are mainly two differences (a) we don't know yet the strength of this particular "version" of the influenza and (b) it seems that there is no known human immunity to it. However, that still doesn't make it worth all the hype it's gained, IMO.

  11. #56
    Malum in se abachler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,189
    Quote Originally Posted by Desolation View Post
    Expert says 'just another flu virus,' so why the fear?

    It seems you're mostly right. That's what I thought as well. There are mainly two differences (a) we don't know yet the strength of this particular "version" of the influenza and (b) it seems that there is no known human immunity to it. However, that still doesn't make it worth all the hype it's gained, IMO.
    We never know the strength of a new strain.

    There is never any known human immunity, or else the flu woudlnt infect human's. Many peopel are immune to new strains, but you don't hear news stories like 'Flu virus fails to infect millions of people, reports say effected individuals 'feeling fine'. So what if this is a super flu that infects nearly 100% instead of the usualy 5 to 20%. So lots more people will get infected, and ostensibly more people will die, not from its highly virulent nature, but merely because the numbers of infected will be higher. I say its a good thing, weed out the weak and infirm based on some arbitrary immunilogical factor. It beats dealing with the moralizing objections of actively choosing the inferior traits to remove from the gene pool. If I get it, I'm going to take a plane ride to every country in the world, but hey, that's just the kind of nice guy I am
    Last edited by abachler; 05-03-2009 at 11:02 AM. Reason: added more hyperbole
    Until you can build a working general purpose reprogrammable computer out of basic components from radio shack, you are not fit to call yourself a programmer in my presence. This is cwhizard, signing off.

  12. #57
    C++ Witch laserlight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    22,303
    Quote Originally Posted by abachler
    Many peopel are immune to new strains, but you don't hear news stories like 'Flu virus fails to infect millions of people, reports say effected individuals 'feeling fine'.
    Heh, I think I actually read a newspaper article along those lines today
    Probably an attempt to keep the hysteria down or something.
    C + C++ Compiler: MinGW port of GCC
    Version Control System: Bazaar

    Look up a C++ Reference and learn How To Ask Questions The Smart Way

  13. #58
    Just a pushpin. bernt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    426
    No way... it's just a typo. The world must end after 2112, because it's such an epic song.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. can some one please tell me the cause of the error ?
    By broli86 in forum C Programming
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 06-26-2008, 09:36 PM
  2. Big help in Astar search code...
    By alvifarooq in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-24-2004, 12:38 PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21