There’s only one flaw in that interpretation...they start with the answer and work backwards to find the appropriate question to ask. They’ve defined the math to fit the idea that they were trying to describe much like the global warming alarmists do (ref: hockey stick). You can make the data fit the observations if you try hard enough and manipulate enough. You can’t conclude anything like this from a book as vague as the bible. Sorry but it just doesn’t work that way.
>Theres only one flaw in that interpretation...they start
>with the answer and work backwards to find the appropriate
>question to ask. Theyve defined the math to fit the idea
>that they were trying to describe much like the global
>warming alarmists do (ref: hockey stick). You can make the
>data fit the observations if you try hard enough and
>manipulate enough. You cant conclude anything like this
>from a book as vague as the bible. Sorry but it just doesnt
>work that way.
The math for all three prophecies works without violence being done to the language of the Bible.
Please support your assertion by naming exactly where the writer of the article, “defined the math to fit the idea that they were trying to describe”.