Where is Harold Camping now?

[Classical Katharine]

He says the "church age" is over. I believe I heard that he explains away the "no one knows the day or the hour, not even the Son, but the Father" verse by saying that that applied during the church age, but now that the church age is over he had discovered the day and the hour of Christ's return.

 

As for the church age being over, as one of our pastors said yesterday, "I will build my church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it." Not much room in there for the church age just ending because someone says it has . . .

 

Double-check me on this, but I believe this is what I heard.

[Hedgehog]

He says the "church age" is over. I believe I heard that he explains away the "no one knows the day or the hour, not even the Son, but the Father" verse by saying that that applied during the church age, but now that the church age is over he had discovered the day and the hour of Christ's return.

 

As for the church age being over, as one of our pastors said yesterday, "I will build my church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it." Not much room in there for the church age just ending because someone says it has . . .

 

Double-check me on this, but I believe this is what I heard.

 

My dh said something similar yesterday - I'm not sure where he read it though. Does this "church age being over" have anything to do with his idea that Satan took over the churches in 1988? Or is he saying that "the church age" was specifically the time when the apostles were alive? Or something?

[Hedgehog]

FYI.

 

Camping to speak May 23

 

Hmm.. I wonder what he will say?

[Joker]

I thought this billboard was funny. It's supposed to be in response to all the billboards advertising May 21st.

[Impish]

Hmm.. I wonder what he will say?

"Whoops."

[Kathleen in VA]

My dh said something similar yesterday - I'm not sure where he read it though. Does this "church age being over" have anything to do with his idea that Satan took over the churches in 1988? Or is he saying that "the church age" was specifically the time when the apostles were alive? Or something?

 

I think this article may answer your questions:

 

http://www.equip.org/articles/harold-camping

[LauraGB]

"Whoops."

:lol:

[twoxcell]

Yes that is exactly what he says. The church age ended in 1988, and God gave the church over to Satan.

[Hedgehog]

Comments like religion being the opiate of the masses, the Second Coming and organized religion being used to control the masses... they have nothing to do with Harold Camping, where he is, or whether or not he was right or wrong. And, frankly, they're insulting. I make a point not to insult the differences I have with other religions, especially on a board such as this one. It's unnecessary and doesn't add to the discussion.

 

Part of me agrees with you - it would be nice not to have such comments thrown into the equation. The vast majority of Christians didn't believe HC's predictions anyway.

[Hedgehog]

I thought this billboard was funny. It's supposed to be in response to all the billboards advertising May 21st.

 

Me likey. :lol::lol::lol:

[DianeW88]

That would solve the headaches. :)

 

And make sense, to boot. :D

 

 

 

*Inserting usual disclaimer that I am not speaking or referring to anybody's personal religious beliefs except my own. I respect everyone's right to worship however and whomever they choose.*

[Audrey]

I thought this billboard was funny. It's supposed to be in response to all the billboards advertising May 21st.

 

 

:lol:

[ThatCyndiGirl]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110523/ts_yblog_thelookout/doomsday-prophet-followers-flabbergasted-world-didnt-end

[LittleIzumi]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110523/ts_yblog_thelookout/doomsday-prophet-followers-flabbergasted-world-didnt-end

 

"Evans, Camping's PR aide, told NPR he hopes Family Radio will reimburse followers who spent their savings in anticipation of the rapture, but that he can't guarantee it."

 

I hope they do.

[Jennifer3141]

"Evans, Camping's PR aide, told NPR he hopes Family Radio will reimburse followers who spent their savings in anticipation of the rapture, but that he can't guarantee it."

 

I hope they do.

 

 

I would not be holding my breath for that one.

[*Inna*]

I thought this billboard was funny. It's supposed to be in response to all the billboards advertising May 21st.

Love. This. :lol:

[SweetBean]

Whoah Nellie. Let us not use this instance as a springboard for this kind of talk. Because someone twists scripture and got countless to believe him does not mean it's suddenly okay for you to call my faith contrived and insult me for believing it.

 

To all the atheists, agnostics, pagan, witches, and countless others here, i go out of my way to be respectful of beliefs i don't agree with. Do likewise, please.

 

Lisa

:iagree::hurray::hurray::thumbup:

 

What I don't understand is why this whole thing (the prediction as well as its failure) is news. The article about HC speaking on 5/23 mentions that "hundreds of his followers" etc. Hundreds? They've got to be kidding! Hundreds of people think the earth is coming to an end and that's news? Wow - that's just amazingly ridiculous. Don't you suppose that at any given time on the face of the earth there are hundreds of people here, there and everywhere who believe things most everyone else thinks are improbable? Why isn't all that stuff news? The real issue, imo, is why the mainstream media thought this was newsworthy.

 

OK, fire away. :tongue_smilie:

The media, like some members of this board, thought this would be a convenient opportunity to tarnish the reputation of all Christians, based on the teachings of a false prophet and cult leader -not at all reflective of Christianity.

[Guest]

Hate? Persecution? I must have missed those posts.

 

Said in a loving way: Maybe you should wonder about what else you are missing. ;)

[nmoira]

 

Said in a loving way: Maybe you should wonder about what else you are missing. ;)

I stand by my words. I see neither hate nor persecution in this thread, unless the definition of those words have been expanded to the point of meaninglessness.

[LibraryLover]

Without the search engine I can't find the channeling thread. However, this headings begs the answer, "certainly not in heaven."

[nmoira]

And I stand by mine.

 

The negative comments were not made out of love. Either way, it doesn't surprise me that you don't see it.

 

Someone stating their personal views, and clearly owning it to be their own opinion is not necessarily hate.

[Guest]

Someone stating their personal views, and clearly owning it to be their own opinion is not necessarily hate.

 

Let's not beat a dead horse, okay? Someone else already explained why it was inappropriate. Repeating why or explaining this to you is clearly not going to help at all, so why bother? You can have your opinion and I can have mine. No biggie.

[nmoira]

 

Let's not beat a dead horse, okay? Someone else already explained why it was inappropriate. Repeating why or explaining this to you is clearly not going to help at all, so why bother? You can have your opinion and I can have mine. No biggie.

Kinda defeats the purpose in having engaged me on it in the first place. But fair enough.

[Guest]

Kinda defeats the purpose in having engaged me on it in the first place. But fair enough.

 

:001_huh: Actually, if you look back, you'll see it was you who quoted/engaged me.

 

Am I the only one who thinks this has gone way past silly?

 

I'm trying to politely end this conversation! If it's the last word you want, fine... take it! Good luck to you, and God bless!

[Audrey]

 

 

The media, like some members of this board, thought this would be a convenient opportunity to tarnish the reputation of all Christians, based on the teachings of a false prophet and cult leader -not at all reflective of Christianity.

 

 

This is that old "but they're not TRUE CHRISTIANS argument." You don't get to pick and choose what reflects a religion (or any other group) or what doesn't. These people clearly defined themselves as Christians. They firmly believe that they are Christians. They do represent Christianity. It may not be a majority representation and it may be an aberrant representation, but it is a representation nonetheless. You can say they aren't Christians. You can say they don't understand Christianity, but they think they are and that they do understand. Perhaps they say the same of you and every other Christian who doesn't follow their teachings. But, guess what? You are ALL still representatives of Christianity.

 

It is just the same as goth kids who mix up love potions in the name of witchcraft. They represent witchcraft -- even if only a minor segment of it. Bernese Mountain dogs represent dogs, even though they are a small minority of dogs. Not all politicians are grafters, but the ones who are do represent politicians. Murderers are certainly a minority of human beings, but they represent humanity -- even if only a minor and aberrant segment of it.

 

I don't get to pick who practices witchcraft or how. Bernese Mountain dogs don't get to pick the colour, size and breed of other dogs. Politicians don't get to overlook the corruption in their midst. Humanity doesn't get to divorce itself from the fact that some of us are murderers. Christians don't get to pick who isn't and isn't Christian.

 

If you think a subset of your group is aberrant, then you can certainly say so, but they have just as much right to tell you that you are aberrant. However, you can't just dismiss them and say that they don't count, or that they aren't really part of your group. They would say the same of you, and if you counted all of those objections up, then you wouldn't have anyone left in your group because you'd all be wrong.

 

So while it is fine to say that Camping doesn't reflect your views of your faith, you can't say that he isn't reflective of at least some portion of Christianity.

Edited May 23, 2011 by Audrey

[LauraGB]

I stand by my words. I see neither hate nor persecution in this thread, unless the definition of those words have been expanded to the point of meaninglessness.

 

I'm going to jump in here against my better judgement and just say that I don't really see it either. I saw and understood the referenced words in posts, but maybe I've been hanging around here too long because they didn't strike me as being hateful - those were tame and not really meant to be condescending to our fellow boardies of any faith. At least, I didn't take it that way. There has been enough proof of the hurtful power of argument on these boards, and I don't think this qualifies; it is just a few people stating what they think right along with many others stating what they think, too. Sounds like conversation to me.

[nmoira]

:001_huh: Actually, if you look back, you'll see it was you who quoted/engaged me.

 

Am I the only one who thinks this has gone way past silly?

 

I'm trying to politely end this conversation! If it's the last word you want, fine... take it! Good luck to you, and God bless!

My apologies, I was sure I'd originally quoted someone else. :001_smile:

[Guest]

My apologies, I was sure I'd originally quoted someone else. :001_smile:

 

No apology needed. :)

[Parrothead]

This is that old "but they're not TRUE CHRISTIANS argument." You don't get to pick and choose what reflects a religion (or any other group) or what doesn't. These people clearly defined themselves as Christians. They firmly believe that they are Christians. They do represent Christianity. It may not be a majority representation and it may be an aberrant representation, but it is a representation nonetheless. You can say they aren't Christians. You can say they don't understand Christianity, but they think they are and that they do understand. Perhaps they say the same of you and every other Christian who doesn't follow their teachings. But, guess what? You are ALL still representatives of Christianity.

 

It is just the same as goth kids who mix up love potions in the name of witchcraft. They represent witchcraft -- even if only a minor segment of it. Bernese Mountain dogs represent dogs, even though they are a small minority of dogs. Not all politicians are grafters, but the ones who are do represent politicians. Murderers are certainly a minority of human beings, but they represent humanity -- even if only a minor and aberrant segment of it.

 

I don't get to pick who practices witchcraft or how. Bernese Mountain dogs don't get to pick the colour, size and breed of other dogs. Politicians don't get to overlook the corruption in their midst. Humanity doesn't get to divorce itself from the fact that some of us are murderers. Christians don't get to pick who isn't and isn't Christian.

 

If you think a subset of your group is aberrant, then you can certainly say so, but they have just as much right to tell you that you are aberrant. However, you can't just dismiss them and say that they don't count, or that they aren't really part of your group. They would say the same of you, and if you counted all of those objections up, then you wouldn't have anyone left in your group because you'd all be wrong.

 

So while it is fine to say that Camping doesn't reflect your views of your faith, you can't say that he isn't reflective of at least some portion of Christianity.

:hurray::hurray::hurray: Thank you!

[Joy at Home]

This is that old "but they're not TRUE CHRISTIANS argument." You don't get to pick and choose what reflects a religion (or any other group) or what doesn't. These people clearly defined themselves as Christians. They firmly believe that they are Christians. They do represent Christianity. It may not be a majority representation and it may be an aberrant representation, but it is a representation nonetheless. You can say they aren't Christians. You can say they don't understand Christianity, but they think they are and that they do understand. Perhaps they say the same of you and every other Christian who doesn't follow their teachings. But, guess what? You are ALL still representatives of Christianity.

 

It is just the same as goth kids who mix up love potions in the name of witchcraft. They represent witchcraft -- even if only a minor segment of it. Bernese Mountain dogs represent dogs, even though they are a small minority of dogs. Not all politicians are grafters, but the ones who are do represent politicians. Murderers are certainly a minority of human beings, but they represent humanity -- even if only a minor and aberrant segment of it.

 

I don't get to pick who practices witchcraft or how. Bernese Mountain dogs don't get to pick the colour, size and breed of other dogs. Politicians don't get to overlook the corruption in their midst. Humanity doesn't get to divorce itself from the fact that some of us are murderers. Christians don't get to pick who isn't and isn't Christian.

 

If you think a subset of your group is aberrant, then you can certainly say so, but they have just as much right to tell you that you are aberrant. However, you can't just dismiss them and say that they don't count, or that they aren't really part of your group. They would say the same of you, and if you counted all of those objections up, then you wouldn't have anyone left in your group because you'd all be wrong.

 

So while it is fine to say that Camping doesn't reflect your views of your faith, you can't say that he isn't reflective of at least some portion of Christianity.

 

Fair enough. But Audrey, this is not really the point. Comments were made about organized religion and the second coming of Christ with the insinuation that anyone who subscribed to this nuttiness is gullible and uneducated. If one wants to hold the opinion that this group was too easily swayed by a false prophet, fine. But don't make blanket derogatory statements about Christianity and think it's the same thing. It's not.

 

Lisa

[Audrey]

Fair enough. But Audrey, this is not really the point. Comments were made about organized religion and the second coming of Christ with the insinuation that anyone who subscribed to this nuttiness is gullible and uneducated. If one wants to hold the opinion that this group was too easily swayed by a false prophet, fine. But don't make blanket derogatory statements about Christianity and think it's the same thing. It's not.

 

Lisa

 

 

Not really the point? There were plenty of comments about this guy from all camps. If he doesn't represent what you feel, say so. Several people did just that. Some were even Christians who said they did not believe him for x, y, z reasons. Other people are just dismissing him as Christian entirely. Even you are calling him a false prophet. It's in-fighting. Pick and choose your members. Pick and choose your offense. It's the same.

[Joy at Home]

For me, if the people were seriously following him and truly led to believe that yesterday was "the day", then the last of our worries should be the aftermath because there is something very wrong with these people to begin with. No sane person jumps on that band wagon, but then again the second coming and organized religion is a contrived idea to control people...but that's just me.

 

Not just you.

 

Also, not just you.

 

Or you! Although I'm late because I've been cleaning all day. :D

Opiate of the masses, indeed...

 

These type comments are not "in-fighting". Christians disagreeing on doctrine I can handle. Non-believers using this to mock religion I can't.

 

Lisa

[MelanieM]

These type comments are not "in-fighting". Christians disagreeing on doctrine I can handle. Non-believers using this to mock religion I can't.

 

Lisa

 

I don't see that as mocking religion. I see it as people stating what they believe to be true about religion in general, which is an opinion they're well within their rights to hold. I'd be rich if I had a quarter for the number of times I've read here that I'm going to hell because I'm a non-believer. If I can let that roll off my back as an opinion a bunch of people have that is irrelevant to me, then I think Christians can have the same level of understanding when non-believers express their disbelief. Certainly it's no more offensive/out-of-bounds than suggesting that us non-believers are going to spend eternity burning for our lack of belief?

[Gooblink]

These type comments are not "in-fighting". Christians disagreeing on doctrine I can handle. Non-believers using this to mock religion I can't.

 

Lisa

 

Don't take it personally, Lisa. Jesus warned us to expect it.

 

I'm a Bible-believing, born again, baptized in the Holy Spirit Jesus Freak, and I actually take no issue with non-believers mocking my faith. I know what I've experienced. Noboy's is going to shake my faith, because I've walked also in their shoes and had the same opinion of religion and the folks who subscribe to it.

 

I am far more concerned about the infighting and nit-picking we do to our own sisters and brothers (I count myself among the guilty). This board and the various faiths an opinions expressed herein have taught me a lot.

 

Mostly, that I have a lot to learn. :)

[Joy at Home]

I don't see that as mocking religion. I see it as people stating what they believe to be true about religion in general, which is an opinion they're well within their rights to hold. I'd be rich if I had a quarter for the number of times I've read here that I'm going to hell because I'm a non-believer. If I can let that roll off my back as an opinion a bunch of people have that is irrelevant to me, then I think Christians can have the same level of understanding when non-believers express their disbelief. Certainly it's no more offensive/out-of-bounds than suggesting that us non-believers are going to spend eternity burning for our lack of belief?

 

I would never make those statements to you, and I can't say I see that on this board.

[MelanieM]

I would never make those statements to you, and I can't say I see that on this board.

 

You've never seen a mention on these boards of non-believers spending eternity in hell? Really?

[Joy at Home]

You've never seen a mention on these boards of non-believers spending eternity in hell? Really?

 

 

Yeah, really.

[nmoira]

 

These type comments are not "in-fighting". Christians disagreeing on doctrine I can handle. Non-believers using this to mock religion I can't.

Surely you don't expect someone who isn't Christian to believe that the Rapture (with or without a date circled on the calendar) is anything other than a man-made idea?

[MelanieM]

Yeah, really.

 

Ok, then we must read different threads. I've certainly seen that belief pop up often enough the past couple years. (And I will admit to my exaggeration... I wouldn't be rich off a quarter for every mention of it. But I would have enough for my morning coffee for the week.)

[JessieC]

I don't see that as mocking religion. I see it as people stating what they believe to be true about religion in general, which is an opinion they're well within their rights to hold. I'd be rich if I had a quarter for the number of times I've read here that I'm going to hell because I'm a non-believer. If I can let that roll off my back as an opinion a bunch of people have that is irrelevant to me, then I think Christians can have the same level of understanding when non-believers express their disbelief. Certainly it's no more offensive/out-of-bounds than suggesting that us non-believers are going to spend eternity burning for our lack of belief?

 

:iagree:

[Joy at Home]

Surely you don't expect someone who isn't Christian to believe that the Rapture (with or without a date circled on the calendar) is anything other than a man-made idea?

Of course you can believe what you want. Not believing it and openly mocking it are entirely different.

 

Lisa

[Jennifer3141]

These type comments are not "in-fighting". Christians disagreeing on doctrine I can handle. Non-believers using this to mock religion I can't.

 

Lisa

 

Oh, I'm not "mocking" religion. I think religion can be very powerful. But leaders like this wackoo make me very, very glad that I don't have an Xtians in my life. And I have seen studies that cult have the same effects on the brain as drugs, ie. opiates.

Edited May 23, 2011 by Jennifer3141

[delaney]

Whoah Nellie. Let us not use this instance as a springboard for this kind of talk. Because someone twists scripture and got countless to believe him does not mean it's suddenly okay for you to call my faith contrived and insult me for believing it.

 

To all the atheists, agnostics, pagan, witches, and countless others here, i go out of my way to be respectful of beliefs i don't agree with. Do likewise, please.

 

Lisa

 

Of course you can believe what you want. Not believing it and openly mocking it are entirely different.

 

Lisa

I didn't mock. I stated that it was my belief that organized religion is contrived by man, but I know that on this board that starts up matches. I think that someone stating that maybe "you are missing more than you know" with the implication that you are wrong by NOT being Christian is just as much a mock. It implies that non-believers are ignorant of what the bible says. I was raised Christian, Episcopalian to be exact. I have read the bible in its entirety. I lived through most of my life going through the motions because I was told that I needed to. It was liberating to finally say no. No, I don't get this. No, I don't want your sympathy or your prayers. Yes, I am fine with not believing. I in no way said that Christians were nutty or ignorant.

[elizabeth]

I have an idea.

[Audrey]

I would never make those statements to you, and I can't say I see that on this board.

 

 

Well, you see what you look for, Lisa. You aren't looking for it, probably because it doesn't pertain to you. I can assure you, though, that it does happen. I'm certainly not advocating titt for tatt, though I fail to see how the quotes you quoted are doing anything more than stating someone's belief. It may be different than yours, but we're just as entitled to our thoughts, beliefs and opinions as you are to yours.

[nmoira]

 

Of course you can believe what you want. Not believing it and openly mocking it are entirely different.

Stating an opinion in a non-proselytizing manner is not disrespectful or mocking, though it might be uncomfortable.

[Joy at Home]

I have an idea.

 

:bigear:

 

:D

[nmoira]

 

I think that someone stating that maybe "you are missing more than you know" with the implication that you are wrong by NOT being Christian is just as much a mock.

I deliberately chose to interpret those words in the least offensive way. I choose not to feel persecuted. :tongue_smilie:

[nmoira]

I have an idea.

This feels like one of those moments someone breaks into a fully orchestrated song, but you can't see the musicians.

[kchara]

Yeah, really.

 

:iagree: And I've certainly never heard mocking of other religions like there was on this thread. Like I said in my PP, it was just unnecessary and insulting.