General Chat

Cynthia, also not a church goer as you know, but from a general point of view I'd say it depends on the seriousness/nature of the illness and whether the cleric is also a friend ie known and liked, and the same for the member of the congregation?

Really depends on the individual and their wishes.

Cynthia ................

to answer your question, at least in part.

As you know I am not a churchgoer, OH is (although he is not going as regularly now because of some "church politics").

He was in hospital back in 2005 for colon cancer, the priest at that time was a truly religious but also "common" man, who could talk on many topics. I really liked him .......... he never tried to talk religion to me but we had long conversations in the coffee shop (somewhat like one of your friends, I think).

Anyway, he visited OH several times in the hospital, talked about anything under the sun that would seem to divert or interest OH, and then offered a short prayer before he left.

OH always enjoyed his visits, as much for the conversation as the prayer.

I'm almost certain that none of the parishioners at his church would have been welcome at OH's bedside at that time. But that says more about them, than about your "trained" member of the congregation.

In reply Cynthia, During 2013 I had a lengthy stay in Hospital, several surgical operations, caught a serious Healthcare Acquired Disease, on a drip every day,
very serious, days turned into weeks.In all that time I'd never had a motion.
A Priest came on the ward and asked "any last rites or confessions" I mentioned my "problem" as he was leaving the ward.At 3.00 pm that same afternoon I couldn't
get to bathroon quick enough on one arthritic knee using walking frame.Just got there in time.Coincidence ?

Good morning :-)

Will you excuse me for a while, I think I need to go and buy some aspirin and lie down in a darkened room!!!! :-D :-D :-D

Rambling, there is a lot to be said for that quote from Jerome K. Jerome <3

Before I post for today, I want to ask you all a question. If you are/were a regular church attender and had fallen sick and, maybe, in hospital, who would you prefer a visit from......a cleric or a trained member of the congregation? Its just to do with a conversation I have been having elsewhere :-D

Right, for today!

In the sermon yesterday – we were encouraged to ‘grow in Godliness’. I had a little look around and came across several schools of thought on the matter, but the one which caught my eye was entitled….’How to get Godly (if you’ve got the guts)’. So let’s see what it says…(abbreviated)

God listens carefully to all our prayers, but we usually can’t predict how He will choose to answer them. There is one prayer that God always answers “yes” to, though: praying for spiritual growth.

Here’s how we can pray for spiritual growth and work with God to mature us in our faith:

Firstly, recognize the three different levels of spiritual maturity.

1. Christians start as spiritual children, getting acquainted with Jesus as their Saviour but not yet developing much of His character.

2. Then Christians progress to spiritual 'young men and women' who are growing in their knowledge of Jesus and the Bible.

3. Finally, Christians mature into spiritual 'mothers and fathers', who have developed intimate friendships with Jesus and have learned how to live in ways that help them fulfil His purposes for their lives.

Continued tomorrow…..

Lord, help me to recognise where I am in my maturing life with you. Help me to recognise where I need to grow, how I need to improve and guide me in the right direction. Lord, in your mercy, hear my prayer.


Cx :-)

Good morning all :-D <3 Well my 6025 wasn't far out in the scheme of

things, t'was a guess from this old man's memory.

There are many "creationists" employed in high offices, our governors.

So to give Cynthia, even more to read in the morning :-)

Something I re-read last night, Jerome K Jerome 'My life and Times'


"I remember a conversation I once had with Zangwill. We were sitting in a wood upon a fallen tree. My little dog was with us. A cute little fellow. He sat between us, looking intently from one to the other as we talked. Zangwill thought that, as a dog is able to conceive of certain attributes of man, so man is able to grasp and understand a little part of God. A portion of man's nature is shared by the dog. So far, my dog, looking up into my eyes, knows me—can translate my wishes and commands. But for the rest, I remain a mystery to him. His earnest eyes look up at me, wondering, troubled. Till a rabbit crosses his path, and he scampers off.

A part of God's nature man shares. To that extent, he apprehends God—can be the friend, the helper of God. But God Himself, man's finite mind cannot conceive. For knowledge of God, we must be content to wait. But, meanwhile, our business is to seek Him, lest we lose touch with Him. "

David with respect to the good bishop ( 4 January 1581 – 21 March 1656),
who was obviously very learned and with good intent, he lived long before carbon dating, long before so many archaeological discoveries were made.

" A number of attempts at using the “begat” method of determining the antiquity of an event—essentially counting backward in time through each documented human generation—led to the age of the Earth being calculated at several thousand years. One such attempt was made by Archbishop James Ussher of Ireland, who in 1650 determined that the Creation had occurred during the evening of Oct. 22, 4004 BC. By his analysis of biblical genealogies, the Earth was not even 6,000 years old!"

edit: cross posted with David.

Ussher’s Chronology
To understand his work, we must first rid ourselves of this notion that Ussher was working to “quench scientific knowledge and inquiry” with static dogma. To do so gravely misinterprets chronological thinking at the time. Attempts to establish a timeline of human history were a major scholarly pursuit in Ussher’s time, and his methods and conclusions were well supported by other researchers. The Venerable Bede, writing in about AD 723, had reckoned the dawn of humanity at 3952 BC, and more contemporary scholars such as Scaliger (3949 BC),the astronomer Johannes Kepler (3992 BC) and the great Isaac Newton (c. 4000 BC) had all come to similar calculations.

As to the scholarly merits of Ussher’s efforts, the calculation of such dates required some serious research and historical reckoning. James Barr emphasises this academic aspect in his study of Ussher’s chronology. Contrary to the common textbook presentation of simply adding up genealogies, Barr identifies three distinct periods of history that Ussher had to deal with to arrive at this date:

The genealogies (from Adam to Solomon). For this period, there is an unbroken succession of the male lineage with ages of each heir at the birth of their son. Even so, the Hebrew and Septuagint Bibles differ by nearly 1500 years in their totals. Ussher went with the Hebrew bible and added up the numbers.
The period of kings (from Solomon to the Babylonian captivity, or around 930 BC – 586 BC). Here things get much more complicated: the succession of kings is not continuous, as regents sometimes rule for periods between successive kings, and there are even overlaps between reigns. Considerable cross-referencing is needed to correlate the Judean kings with other contemporaneous histories.
Between the Testaments (from Ezra and Nehemiah to the birth of Jesus). The Biblical record of the Old Testament ends with the accounts of Ezra and Nehemiah returning to Jerusalem and rebuilding the Second Temple, which probably happened in about 515 BC. For this 5-century intermission, Ussher relied entirely on alternative timelines such as the Chaldean and Persian histories. By correlating significant events (such as the reign of Nebuchadnezzar), these histories could be used as a “bridge” to connect the Jewish and the Roman timelines, and thus ultimately arrive at the birth of Jesus in about 4 BC.
In all, it is reckoned that Ussher relied on the Biblical narrative for only one sixth of his chronology. The rest of his references came from his in-depth study of Chaldean, Persian, Greek and Roman history – which, we note, represented virtually all of ancient history know in Europe at the time. His dating of other historical events (such as the deaths of Alexander and Julius Caesar in 323 BC and 44 BC respectively) is in accordance with current estimates.

It may seem a little too neat that his estimate for “Creation to the birth of Jesus” comes out at exactly 4000 years. Indeed, it becomes even more suspicious in light of the common view (in Ussher’s day) that the Earth would last 6000 years. Barr considers this question in his study, but ultimately decides against the idea that Ussher “fiddled the numbers” according to a preconceived notion. Although he was no doubt delighted to calculate that the first temple was completed exactly 3000 years after Creation and was followed exactly 1000 years later by the coming of Christ (the fulfillment of the temple), Ussher appears to interpret these as confirmations of his work rather than a priori assumptions. Stephen Jay Gould comments on Barr’s analysis:

First, Ussher’s chronology extends out to several volumes and 2,000 pages of text and seems carefully done, without substantial special pleading. Second, the death of Herod in 4 B.C. doesn’t establish the birth of Jesus in the same year. Herod became king of Judea (Roman puppet would be more accurate) in 37 B.C. – and Jesus might have been born at other times in this thirty-three-year interval. Moreover, other traditions argued that the 4,000 years would run from creation to Christ’s crucifixion, not to his birth – thus extending the possibilities to A.D. 33. By these flexibilities, creation could have been anywhere between 4037 B.C. (4,000 years to the beginning of Herod’s reign) and 3967 B.C. (4,000 years to the Crucifixion). Four thousand four is in the right range, but certainly not ordained by symbolic tradition. You still have to calculate.

The Great Pursuit of Knowledge
Finally, and most importantly, let us note the intent of Ussher’s chronology. He was not attempting to impose the authority of rigid dogma: rather, he sought to illuminate and give meaning to human endeavour by giving it a proper historical context. As Barr wrote:

It is a great mistake, therefore, to suppose that Ussher was simply concerned with working out the date of creation: this can be supposed only by those who have never looked into its pages.... The Annales are an attempt at a comprehensive chronological synthesis of all known historical knowledge, biblical and classical.... Of its volume only perhaps one sixth or less is biblical material.

Contrary to the common presentation of Ussher struggling to refute geological timescales, his scholarship was actually at odds with the Aristotelian notion of an eternal Earth, in which human history has neither context nor consequence. Ironically, Ussher was more concerned with why God had chosen to take a whole six days for Creation, when surely he could have achieved it all in an instant. Gould writes:

We castigate Ussher for making the creation so short – a mere six days, where we reckon billions for evolution. But Ussher fears that six days might seem too long in the opinion of his contemporaries, for why should God, who could do all in an instant, so spread out his work? “Why was he creating so long, seeing he could have perfected all the creatures at once and in a moment?” Ussher gives a list of answers, but one caught my attention both for its charm and for its incisive statement about the need for sequential order in teaching – as good a rationale as one could ever devise for working out a chronology in the first place! “To teach us the better to understand their workmanship; even as a man which will teach a child in the frame of a letter, will first teach him one line of the letter, and not the whole letter together.”

Additional notes
Ussher’s aim was to use ancient histories to construct a continuous timeline for all human civilisation, not just the history of the Jewish nation. He did this based on historic documents (from all cultures that he could find) which offered the best available accounts of historic events, and painstakingly correlated different cultural records to build a cohesive whole.

From the appearance of humans on the scene, his account is not based on “religious authority” – how can it be, since most of his timeline is not even based on the Bible? Yes, he does regard the histories recorded in the Biblical texts as being accurate, but I don’t think we can really criticise that as a working assumption – particularly as they have been overwhelmingly endorsed by archaeological evidence in the 350 years since Ussher.

For the period preceding humans there are (of course) no historical eye-witness accounts, so he assumes for completeness that a literal interpretation of Genesis 1 is a reasonable guide. Why not? He was not a geologist, and was not particularly concerned with the creation of the Earth – nor with “rigidly asserting a blind dogma in the face of evidence”. His interest was in human history, and in that context his work was exceptional.

In reply (not my own opinion) I recall reading of an Irish Priest who claimed

that according to OT genealogy the earth was created in 6025BC

James Ussher - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › James_Ussher
James Ussher was the Church of Ireland Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of All Ireland ... A noted collector of Irish manuscripts, he made them available for research to fellow-scholars such as his friend, Sir James Ware. .... years between Flood and Creation, Ussher chose the Masoretic version, which claims an unbroken

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prehistoric_Egypt

some of the artefacts and info,

David ..............

where on earth did you get the idea that the Egyptians had a "relatively short pre-history"????

They had a very long history


Don't forget, many of the civilizations that existed before ours, whether that be the Egyptians, the Romans, the Celts, the Druids, or First Nations of many countries, knew a heck of a lot more than we do about the Equinox, the movements of the sun, moon and stars. Many of those peoples used to be called "savages".

Those "savages" knew about navigating across the Atlantic, the Pacific and other seas centuries before the white man knew how.

We're almost complete ignoramuses of many aspects ............. our civilization is still trying to work out how Stonehenge was built, as well as the Pyramids.

There is gold jewellry to be found in graves thousands of years old that cannot be reproduced by modern-day jewellers. I saw some of it in a museum in St Petersburg (back when it was still called Leningrad).

Rose, that video was titled Flight of Faith.
You may be able to find it in a better format :-D

Just a thought, if the Egyptians had a relatively
short pre-history, how would they have known of
the procession of the equinox ?

Nice to view the video of The Holy Land David, but only with the sound off, the script was a step too far for me :-)

I remember reading Erich Von Danikens "Chariots of the Gods" maybe when I was about 16? Many of his theories in that and other books were debunked. His honesty is also questioned,

see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_von_Däniken

I am happy to believe there may be aliens out there but they didn't build the pyramids that's certain.

Hello again thread :-D <3

Another video of the Holy lands during Jesus' ministry.

https://youtu.be/gU5p6061M34

I thank you for your post Vera :-D I'm mot an expert on anything, not even

Judaism and Christianity. Constantine gave the formerly illegal Christians several

locations, one of which became the Vatican. The brief video is of Via Dolorosa

https://youtu.be/hXqITd_dmdI

Hallo David and everyone

I have just tried watching the YouTube video about the pyramids at Giza and I only got a very few minutes in before I decided the narrator, Erich von Daniken, was bending the facts to fit his theories. When he started mentioning Alien technology and extra terrestrial visitors I am afraid I gave up. However I did check up on him and on Gaia, the production company that made the video. His books all seem to revolve around the idea of aliens and he reckons he has proof that we are descendants of Galactic pioneers. Maybe he is right - who knows? - but the "proof" he is offering is not, in my view, proof in any accepted sense of the word.

David, this is one of several documentaries about the Great Pyramids and there are lots of books on the subject so look at several and compare them and then make up your own mind. You might find you agree with Erich von Daniken and that's fine. You will have made an informed choice. Just be aware that anyone can post anything on YouTube and be a little bit sceptical.

Lecture over :-D Please keep posting your ideas. You do make me think.

Something else that made me think recently was a visit to the Jersey War Tunnels. It's basically the story of the WW2 occupation of Jersey and there were a number of tales of people informing on their neighbours, for instance that they had a hidden radio, and stories of collaboration with the occupying forces for rewards such as extra food. It made me think about what I would do in that situation. If my children were starving would the mother in me collaborate in order to get food for them or would I stick to my beliefs and principles even though they were starving? What a dilemma. I didn't come to any decision :-S

So a special thought tonight for people who are still living in war zones and still starving.

Good afternoon <3 On Y**Tube there are several video of Jerusalem.

One follows the route of the last day of Jesus from his scourging

through the the site of his Crucifxion.

Rose ........

I hope you find it, because it is quite fascinating to read, and to see how just a little distance could separate the area where Jesus was according to the Bible and where people think it was.

Of course, this doesn't apply to major sites.