Add Chris Jones to the list of pro athletes that think the earth is flat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jack Lambert

I do agree the bible is taken to literally. Somehow hell is a real place. Many bible scholars agree that hell is a metaphor for "being out of present of god". The feeling is so bad it's like being in a burning lake.

---

Lol, very true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarius

I have been in the part of this world where the stories from the Bible took place for a good while. If you can come over here and deal with these people and still believe that they have ever had any clue as to who the true God is (or if there really is a God), then more power to you. Most of these idiots can't walk and chew bubble gum at the same time. Maybe they were a lot smarter 5 thousand years ago. Do you guys know what the average IQ was back then? I mean the things they used to do and believe in are ridiculous. I don't know what the truth is, but I'm equally confident that no one over here has ever had a clue either. That does not mean that there aren't some really good things to live by in multiple religions. I tend to think that people of devout religion have seen drastic improvements in their life because most religions are full of really good teachings that are great to live by in general (minus the nutjobs that want to blow people up or massacre people in the name of religion). If you follow actually the teachings of Christianity, you're generally going to be a pretty good dude and be a nice person. Your life is going to improve. That's awesome. I don't think it proves anything else. Maybe I'm wrong. I think if I go to hell for not believing something that can't be proven and happened thousands of years ago then that's not really fair.

anyway.......

As for the Chris Jones flat earth......I don't care. Hope he continues to do well and makes a boatload of money.

---

So...quick question. What does THAT part of the world indicate regarding someone understanding science or bein in touch with a higher power?

That part of the world is where all of this started and originated (the Bible is the reason most people on here believe in creationism I would guess). A bunch of people in a time period that believed in a whole bunch of nonsense in other areas all of a sudden got the creator of the universe correct? Ok. If you believe that then fine. I am not here to judge. I simply do not. You guys may be correct. The only thing I truly know is that I am not smart enough to figure it out.

It's an odd thing that we as southern protestants tend to cling to. The entirety of our faith actually becomes stronger when you stop clinging to subjective views of what is "right" and take Genesis for what it is, a collection of beliefs that Jews held at the time of it's writing. It's why we see two different creation stories in Genesis 1 & 2, because they were literally giving the two more prominent theories/beliefs at the time of writing. Which dates to the Mesopotamian ideas that the Earth is flat with water both above and beneath it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarius

That part of the world is where all of this started and originated (the Bible is the reason most people on here believe in creationism I would guess). A bunch of people in a time period that believed in a whole bunch of nonsense in other areas all of a sudden got the creator of the universe correct? Ok. If you believe that then fine. I am not here to judge. I simply do not. You guys may be correct. The only thing I truly know is that I am not smart enough to figure it out.

---

I spent a bit of time there although it was in Saudi Arabia. I didn?t get the impression they were lacking in intelligence or more susceptible to falsehood. My perception could be inaccurate.

Given our choice of President, I?d say the rest of the world could call into question our part off the world as well. But it wouldn?t be an accurate way of assessing anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gravedigger

Beardo is not your adversary in this. His position is that Christians are not all fundamentalist/biblical literalists and I see your point too.

Probably my oldest friend on this board pointed out to me years ago whenI was laughing about Scientology and it?s assertions about exploding volcanos, that my faith?s miracles was no less irrational. And he was absolutely correct. It probably shaped my belief from that moment forward.

Man?s INABILITY to understand or prove something is no indication of its impossibility.

---

You use your tongue prettier than a twenty dollar whore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gravedigger

I spent a bit of time there although it was in Saudi Arabia. I didn?t get the impression they were lacking in intelligence or more susceptible to falsehood. My perception could be inaccurate.

Given our choice of President, I?d say the rest of the world could call into question our part off the world as well. But it wouldn?t be an accurate way of assessing anything.

---

The average IQ of Americans is about 10 points higher than many countries in the Middle East. They have been fighting and killing over religion in the Middle East since the beginning of known history. A large % of people live in poverty in many of these countries. All of that aside, the intelligence of man in general during that time period was much lower than it is now (which was my real point). They believed a bunch of things back then that would get you committed to an insane asylum today, yet many people believe (and fight wars over) religious beliefs that started during that time period. I just don't get it, but maybe I'm not supposed to.

However, I was (and will be again) one of the ones responsible for voting our current president in office so maybe I am not qualified to have this conversation with you. Have a good one!

I love to gather and argue information related to life from a sports message board where people can?t even spell our players? names correctly. Where we tell kids they suck and coaches they?re idiots. Where we use aliases so people won?t know what idiots we really are.

Cooterpootians 3:16

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anonymous

It's an odd thing that we as southern protestants tend to cling to. The entirety of our faith actually becomes stronger when you stop clinging to subjective views of what is "right" and take Genesis for what it is, a collection of beliefs that Jews held at the time of it's writing. It's why we see two different creation stories in Genesis 1 & 2, because they were literally giving the two more prominent theories/beliefs at the time of writing. Which dates to the Mesopotamian ideas that the Earth is flat with water both above and beneath it.

---

Great points. To me, it's why the Biblical "literalists" 1) get so much push back from fellow Christians and non-Christians, and 2) draw the ire of people who just want to hate on Christianity, in general (which declaring the Earth is 6k years old, despite very basic [& non controversial] science and overwhelming evidence to the contrary, obviously makes an easy target).

Arguing for things that aren't even explicitly stated in the Bible as being absolutely central to your understanding of the faith, and having a "it's all true ,or none of it's true" (as one poster has stated), is what makes discussing these issues so frustrating. What does the age of the Earth have at all to do with the teachings or philosophy of Christ? (**whispers**...nothing....)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawgs

I don't rule out some kinda force, energy, spirit, whatever, something that's out there that created the universe and what's even outside the universe that we are expanding into. But that's not the same thing as believing any one religion is the one that got god right, which is what anyone who claims to be religious believes. Everyone believes they are the right religion and the others are the wrong religion with no more evidence than the book they were told to believe when they were kids. As far as where the universe came from, obviously there was some kinda force. Whether that was god in the concept that religion tends to view god that caused the Big Bang or there's some scientific explanation we still haven't figured out that we just call "god", who knows, but I'm plenty fine assuming none of humanity's various religions have gotten it right about whatever god is out there pulling the strings. Just be kind to others and treat them how you want to be treated and it'll all work out in the end.

---

You are correct to a degree but that is where you have to really look at the details of religion. The Koran was written around 800AD and repeats much of the Bible origins with some changes however the Bibilical original manuscripts are the oldest writing of any religion. Look at the prophecies of the Bible that have been proven and it will blow your mind. Look up Daniel 24 9-10 prophecy if you want a glimpse. There is not one contradiction in the Bible either even though men recorded it guided by God over thousands of years. Pretty amazing. Look at Isreal (God's chosen people). Humanity tried to destroy them for 2000 years (Hitler) and then they found themselves back in the land God promised 6000 years ago just as God said.

There is one major difference in Biblical Christianity and every other religion. Every other religion has a list of things you must do or not do to be right before God. Biblical Christianity requires nothing, salvation is the free gift of God - God's grace. The Bible answers every question of origin, our problems and our redemption.


I don't understand all about God, no one does but He does tell us what we need to know in His Word - Bible. It would be worth everyone's best interest to seek out the truth of God before that time. I would encourage you all to read it for yourself and don't let bad philosophy from the world turn you away. God sent His son Jesus to take on the sins of mankind so we could have faith in Him and be seen as righteous before a Holy God.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jack Lambert

I do agree the bible is taken to literally. Somehow hell is a real place. Many bible scholars agree that hell is a metaphor for "being out of present of god". The feeling is so bad it's like being in a burning lake.

---

The penalty for sin against a Holy God is death which happened in the Garden of Eden in Genesis when Adam and Eve disobeyed God. They ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil and this is where evil entered the world. God created man to have a free will and he chose to defy God. That penalty is death. That death is a physical death and a spiritual death. Adam and Eve were thrown out of the Garden immediately and separated from God. Death would come to all humanity after that. Death is real - one out of one persons die. Being separated from God is also real. Anyone who does not accept Jesus to cover their sin, will be eternally separated from God. Now some don't think that is a problem, but that separation is not a pleasant separation, it is torture in a burning hot eternal flame. The New Testament tells about a man who went to hell and begged for just a drop of water on his tongue. The Bible describes in great detail the torture that will happen because of rejecting God - that is our choice. Some would love for hell to be a metaphor but it isn't according to God. This is not my opinion, this is what the Bible says.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeardoMSU

Great points. To me, it's why the Biblical "literalists" 1) get so much push back from fellow Christians and non-Christians, and 2) draw the ire of people who just want to hate on Christianity, in general (which declaring the Earth is 6k years old, despite very basic [& non controversial] science and overwhelming evidence to the contrary, obviously makes an easy target).

Arguing for things that aren't even explicitly stated in the Bible as being absolutely central to your understanding of the faith, and having a "it's all true ,or none of it's true" (as one poster has stated), is what makes discussing these issues so frustrating. What does the age of the Earth have at all to do with the teachings or philosophy of Christ? (**whispers**...nothing....)

---

We can all debate a lot of controversial things in the Bible - Christians probably disagree on as much as anyone but how old the earth is doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things. We all have less than 120 years to figure out what we are going to believe (most have much less time than that). Every breath we take is a step closer to seeing God. Bible says that all will see God, but not all will be found redeemed from their sin.


Romans 1:20 says For since the creation of the world, God's invisible qualities, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made so that people are without excuse.

Creation is one of the most complex and incredible things, everything works together to sustain life. The earths physical features, a little closer to sun and we burn up, further we freeze. It has taken humanity all of history just to understand a small piece of creation our world, our bodies. Folks a greater power exists outside of us. That power has shown Himself as the God of the Bible. Might want to ask the question, what if I am wrong about my belief??? What if I (R2Dawg) is wrong? Well I have lived a good life. If anyone who doesn't believe is wrong then your heaven is right now (100 year vapor) and eternity of hell waits. If I am right then eternity with God in heaven (a new earth without sin, evil, pain, suffering, etc. forever.


Big gamble folks, it is worth the time to search this out. Great thing is, your life will be better here on earth too. Find a good Christian church or friends and start reading a Bible to get the answers for yourself. It is all there if you seek, you will find. May you all find God in this life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeardoMSU

You couldn't be more wrong here, in literally every statement.

1. Carbon Dating....does it have limitations? Sure, almost all chemical analyses do, but C14 dating has improved dramatically in it's precision over the last 50 years. The calibrations have been finessed and are constantly checked and rechecked against standards. Many of the dates generated in its early days have been corrected.

2. Not sure why you'd even bring this up in a discussion about the Earth's age. It may come as a surprise to you, but C14 is not used to date the really really old materials from millions of years ago, i.e., fossils, volcanic eruptions, stratigraphy, etc.; different methods are used for that, such as Potassium-Argon, Lead Isotopes, Uranium Isotopes. The reason for this is because C14 dating has an age threshold of ca. 50-60 thousand years, and this limitation is pretty essential to our understanding of how Carbon 14 decays and it's ratio with C13.

3. What is this "proof" you speak of?

4. "Carbon dating uses extrapolation of unknown data"....what are you talking about here? C14 dating as a method and concept is actually pretty straight forward, and the "data" are certainly not "unknown".

5a. "Living mollusks have been dated to thousands of years old and many more studies"....ok, wth are you talking about here? Yeah, there are mollusks living today that, when their growth bands are counted, show that they've been alive for thousands of years....What does that have to do with C14 or the age of the Earth?

5b. There is a species of mollusk called Exogyra costata that went extinct at the end of the Cretaceous Period (60 million years ago), and you can find it's remains in abundance on and around MSU's campus, if you're so inclined (check the bluffs out by the disc golf course...can literally pick them up off the ground).

---

Since all your points contain C14, I'll try and explain what I said/meant. In the end, you need to study the evidence of God, Bible, etc. for yourself. I can't convince you of any truth until you discover it for yourself. Now back to your counter points.

C14 dating is about the only science we have to date something but it is not accurate past 25-30,000 years. It was only invented in 1947, by Willard Libby. C14 is measures the % of unstable carbon 14 isotopes in once living objects. The half life of C14 is only 5730 years so in 5 half lives (29,000 years) very little C14 remains. Here are a few examples of known C14 dating discrepancies: Since C14 has only been around for 70 years, the rates over thousands of years is assumed constant which in real science is not really science at all when you extrapolate that far.

Mollushs living test dated at 2300 years old (dead) yet they were alive?, Mortar from an English castle known less than 800 years old tested at 7370 years old, Fresh seal skins dated 1300 years old. There is more but moving on.

There are several factors that can alter C14 decay rates such as volcanic activity, burning, solar activity, cosmic radiation, meteors, Point is if conditions on earth were different in the past, then C14 dating is not reliable beyond about 5000 years.

I am not an expert on C14 dating but the above came from scientific research on the subject from books I have. I did graduate in engineering from Mississippi State University, one of the best engineering schools in the country. You can chose to believe or not. When science is done right, it aligns perfectly with the Bible because God created science too.

From math nothing times anything = nothing so evolution can't be true. So what is true? I believe God's Word has all the truth necessary. Creation and big bang theory just don't mix either. Two rocks hit together and create a higher order and then non living matter into living matter. Where is the energy source?? If that is how it happened, it came from God. This is the second law of thermodynamics, chaos is the normal direction not order and it takes an external energy to bring order from chaos. Does your car get naturally cleaner or dirtier? To get clean we must put energy into it.

Another question about big bang, who created the rocks? Can anyone answer these questions on evolution? They can't because there is only one answer that makes sense - God, Creator, Sustainer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R2Dawg

Since all your points contain C14, I'll try and explain what I said/meant. In the end, you need to study the evidence of God, Bible, etc. for yourself. I can't convince you of any truth until you discover it for yourself. Now back to your counter points.

C14 dating is about the only science we have to date something but it is not accurate past 25-30,000 years. It was only invented in 1947, by Willard Libby. C14 is measures the % of unstable carbon 14 isotopes in once living objects. The half life of C14 is only 5730 years so in 5 half lives (29,000 years) very little C14 remains. Here are a few examples of known C14 dating discrepancies: Since C14 has only been around for 70 years, the rates over thousands of years is assumed constant which in real science is not really science at all when you extrapolate that far.

---

Several things:

For one, C14 is definitely not the only scientific dating method we have; as I mentioned before, we have numerous other absolute chemical dating methods, as well as some other absolute methods that rely on rhythmic layering such as dendrochronology and and ice/snow-fall cores.

Second, you are correct in your research regarding Libby and the half-life, but again, as I said, precision has increased substantially, and, as is the nature of science, incorrect dates have been corrected and new dates are continuously checked against current calibrations. The nature of science is that it is in a constant state of self-policing. That's really a great thing.

Third, your statement of "the rates over thousands of years is assumed" is simply not true. I mentioned in my previous post that C14 calibrations are "checked and rechecked against standards"....well, one of those standards derives from dendrochonology (i.e., analysis of tree ring growth). Trees, as part of their physiology, like mollusks and other sequential growers, absorb distinct chemical signatures within each annual ring as they age. Based on these signatures, geochemists are able to correct for fluctuations of carbon (and other variations) in the Earth's atmosphere and adjust the curve accordingly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R2Dawg

Mollushs living test dated at 2300 years old (dead) yet they were alive?, Mortar from an English castle known less than 800 years old tested at 7370 years old, Fresh seal skins dated 1300 years old. There is more but moving on.

---

I'd like to see where you're getting this info from. I find these type of critical errors extremely dubious, not to mention convenient for this discussion. It's easy, with all chemical analyses, to really **** up your samples, via contamination of all sorts (easy, and sadly, expensive...these things aren't cheap). So I'm suspicious of 1) how these "samples" were collected, 2) where they were collected from, and what is the history of the area/location, 3) how the samples were handled after recovery (this is extremely important), 4)what laboratory conducted the analysis, what mass-spectrometer was used, how was it calibrated, who was the technician, when was the last time it was serviced, etc. etc.

You may think I'm being petty, but I assure you, all of these are important questions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R2Dawg

There are several factors that can alter C14 decay rates such as volcanic activity, burning, solar activity, cosmic radiation, meteors, Point is if conditions on earth were different in the past, then C14 dating is not reliable beyond about 5000 years.

---

This is very true. However, as I pointed out earlier, C14 calibrations are constantly adjusted to reflect these changes in the atmosphere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R2Dawg

I am not an expert on C14 dating

---

Well...I am.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeardoMSU

Several things:

For one, C14 is definitely not the only scientific dating method we have; as I mentioned before, we have numerous other absolute chemical dating methods, as well as some other absolute methods that rely on rhythmic layering such as dendrochronology and and ice/snow-fall cores.

Second, you are correct in your research regarding Libby and the half-life, but again, as I said, precision has increased substantially, and, as is the nature of science, incorrect dates have been corrected and new dates are continuously checked against current calibrations. The nature of science is that it is in a constant state of self-policing. That's really a great thing.

Third, your statement of "the rates over thousands of years is assumed" is simply not true. I mentioned in my previous post that C14 calibrations are "checked and rechecked against standards"....well, one of those standards derives from dendrochonology (i.e., analysis of tree ring growth). Trees, as part of their physiology, like mollusks and other sequential growers, absorb distinct chemical signatures within each annual ring as they age. Based on these signatures, geochemists are able to correct for fluctuations of carbon (and other variations) in the Earth's atmosphere and adjust the curve accordingly.



I'd like to see where you're getting this info from. I find these type of critical errors extremely dubious, not to mention convenient for this discussion. It's easy, with all chemical analyses, to really **** up your samples, via contamination of all sorts (easy, and sadly, expensive...these things aren't cheap). So I'm suspicious of 1) how these "samples" were collected, 2) where they were collected from, and what is the history of the area/location, 3) how the samples were handled after recovery (this is extremely important), 4)what laboratory conducted the analysis, what mass-spectrometer was used, how was it calibrated, who was the technician, when was the last time it was serviced, etc. etc.

You may think I'm being petty, but I assure you, all of these are important questions.



This is very true. However, as I pointed out earlier, C14 calibrations are constantly adjusted to reflect these changes in the atmosphere.



Well...I am.

---

OK, glad I'm talking to the expert. Got a few questions. How are calibrations adjusted from data that can affect C14 dating when there is no data from thousands of years ago? Since it was only created in 1947 then corrections can only have been made since then, all other previous results prior to then have assumptions. The logic just doesn't add up.

The questions you bring up about what lab, technician, etc. points to a form of human error? So if there is human error then the method can't be all that accurate. Human performance analysis has shown humans have on average 5 errors per hour so any human test is well, flawed.

I said in a previous post that Christians disagree on details of Creation, how long, young earth, old earth. I happen to believe in young earth and there are reasons, not C14 reasons but decided to chase that rabbit trial anyway. This is just a sidebar debate, the real debate is the rest of my post. Where did we come from? Who created us? Why are we here? Where do we go after we die? My thoughts on some of it are in other posts. Thanks for the engaging conversation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smootness

I respect you for that searching. Believe me, faith is not always easy. I have had plenty of doubts about various things through the years, and the digging and searching has always resulted in a stronger faith. That does not happen for everyone, but I believe Scripture has real power and that reading it produces faith to those whose eyes have been opened. I would recommend that you keep searching. Believe me, I will continue to dig on questions that I have that don't make sense to me, all the while maintaining faith that ultimately, those questions will lead me back to truth, which I believe is the God of the Bible and Jesus Christ.

I understand your skepticism, I really do. But again, keep searching. If those with the materialistic worldview are correct, then well, who really cares all that much about what conclusions anyone comes to. But, if we who have faith in Christ are correct, then the conclusion at the end is of ultimate consequence. So keep searching. I believe that Christ alone can save, and it may not mean that much to you, but I will be in prayer for you, that you find that truth as well, because I want desperately for you to find salvation.

---

This man gets it and I totally agree. I to will always be praying for the lost( as we Christians call it). I was about to post something similiar in regards to when we die. To the unbelievers, what do you think happens when we die? As a Christian, I believe Jesus died for my sins (everyone's for that matter) and that by believing in him I will be saved from my sins and live with Him in heaven for eternity. But if I choose not to believe, my eternity will be spent in hell.- So my first questions leads me to my second question for the unbeliever. What if I am a right and you are wrong? Because what I believe in has consequences. So my prayer to the unbelievers is keep an open mind to the Christian faith and hopefully the truth that we believe in will find you. Because like I said, what if Christians are right and the others are not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R2Dawg

OK, glad I'm talking to the expert. Got a few questions. How are calibrations adjusted from data that can affect C14 dating when there is no data from thousands of years ago? Since it was only created in 1947 then corrections can only have been made since then, all other previous results prior to then have assumptions. The logic just doesn't add up.

---

Lol...I'm not THE expert, but I am AN expert....but I'm flattered.

Let me try to understand your contention here....so you're saying that since C14 dating has only been around since '47, we don't have "data" on how the carbon 14 isotope behaves? And how that relationship matters in regard to organic material post-death? And how both are reflected via the ratio of C14 and C13 in the biosphere and atmosphere?

Because addressing all of this would require a fairly lengthly response....

Don't get me wrong...I'm happy to do it, but it does require some pretty essential understandings of organic chemistry, isotope decay, and what that means regarding the archaeological (and to some extents, the paleontological) record.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R2Dawg

The questions you bring up about what lab, technician, etc. points to a form of human error? So if there is human error then the method can't be all that accurate. Human performance analysis has shown humans have on average 5 errors per hour so any human test is well, flawed.

---

Of course human error is a part of this discussion; and an important one; and a ubiquitous one to scientific research. Published papers dealing with these topics are explicit in their methods, theory, rational for choice, etc. By "explicit", I mean they know it's of utmost importance to clarify how rigorously careful their sample-prep, analysis, data-extrapolation, etc. was throughout the whole process. As I mentioned before, chemical analysis, like C14, is expensive, so people want to get it right.

But, regarding the "example" experiments/studies you mentioned....I want to see these studies, their data, how they ran their experiments, Etc. I want to see it all. Because there is a lot of pseudo-science out there...and this arena is one of the main battlefields....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R2Dawg

Thanks for the engaging conversation.

---

Of course, man, and right back at ya.

GD, flat earth, chris jones, dumbasses, etc....

this type thread makes me appreciate being a white trash, non votin' redneck with too many guns, too little religion, and a hottub....

carry on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bdawg

This man gets it and I totally agree. I to will always be praying for the lost( as we Christians call it). I was about to post something similiar in regards to when we die. To the unbelievers, what do you think happens when we die? As a Christian, I believe Jesus died for my sins (everyone's for that matter) and that by believing in him I will be saved from my sins and live with Him in heaven for eternity. But if I choose not to believe, my eternity will be spent in hell.- So my first questions leads me to my second question for the unbeliever. What if I am a right and you are wrong? Because what I believe in has consequences. So my prayer to the unbelievers is keep an open mind to the Christian faith and hopefully the truth that we believe in will find you. Because like I said, what if Christians are right and the others are not.

---

Well what if you are wrong and Islamists are right? Buddhists? Insert any other religion....There are millions of other people on this earth that feel just as strongly about their religion being right and yours being wrong. They all have stories of how their religion changed their life for the better and are close to God as well. What are you going to do if you are wrong and they are right? I do not know what I am going to do. I would imagine I will tell God that I was religious growing up and I did not really feel any closer/ less closer to a higher being during that time and I did not trust the theories and stories from thousands of years ago when human beings were savages. If he sends me to hell for that then I guess I will go to hell thinking God is pretty unreasonable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarius

Well what if you are wrong and Islamists are right? Buddhists? Insert any other religion....There are millions of other people on this earth that feel just as strongly about their religion being right and yours being wrong. They all have stories of how their religion changed their life for the better and are close to God as well. What are you going to do if you are wrong and they are right? I do not know what I am going to do. I would imagine I will tell God that I was religious growing up and I did not really feel any closer/ less closer to a higher being during that time and I did not trust the theories and stories from thousands of years ago when human beings were savages. If he sends me to hell for that then I guess I will go to hell thinking God is pretty unreasonable.

---

I guess if I am wrong I will have had a nice life here on earth and that will be it. Now I will admit I'm not sure what eternity holds for those other religions you mentioned. But if I am right I will be spending eternity in paradise while others will be in agony in hell. And eternity is a very very long time. I will also add that it would be hard to believe in some these religions that promote violence and killing in the name of their religion. I find it hard to put much faith in a religion like that. My God is a loving God, but He also puts the ball in our court to believe in Him or not. So the choice is one we all must make for ourself. Good luck and God bless in your choices my friend.