Why I Cannot Believe in the Brahma Kumaris' 5,000 Year Cycle

Classic posts chosen by the admins of xBKChat.com and the users of this website
  • Message
  • Author
Offline
User avatar

admin

site admin

  • Posts: 498
  • Joined: 01 Jan 1970

Why I Cannot Believe in the Brahma Kumaris' 5,000 Year Cycle

Post10 Feb 2012

WHY I CANNOT BELIEVE IN THE BRAHMAKUMARIS' 5000 YEAR CYCLE by Dr Peter Iveson

Today we are in the year 2007 AD (or CE if you prefer). We are still in the Confluence Age. We are not yet in the Golden Age, are we? It follows that the Golden Age must start in or after 2007.

2500 years ago from today would be 493 BC (or BCE). If the 5000 Year Cycle is accurate, that should be somewhere near the end of the Silver Age. That is, the Silver Age should end, and the Copper Age begin, after 493 BC. The Copper Age cannot begin earlier than 493 BC, otherwise the Copper Age and the Iron Age together would be more than 2500 years, which is not permissible, as it would mean that 'Heaven', the Golden Age and Silver Age, would have to be less than 2500 years in order to fit into the 5000 Year Cycle. So the 6th Century BC, that is from 501 BC to 600 BC, should definitely be within the Silver Age. But was it?

The 6th Century BC is not, as Brother Jagdish might have said, 'a remote period of prehistory, about which we know nothing'. There are professors of Ancient Greek, Assyriology, Egyptology, etc., in the major universities, and Curators at the British Museum, who could tell us quite a lot about the first half of the first millennium BC, that is, the period from 1000 BC to 500 BC. There are specialists in the languages and literature of the ancient Middle East, such as the Akkadian language, which was spoken in Babylon, and in the language and culture of the Hittites.

The civilizations of the Middle-East during this period were nothing like the Brahma Kumaris' image of the Silver-Aged world of the Deities Rama and Sita. The civilizations of Greece, Egypt, Sumeria, Assyria etc. all had temples and worshipped their gods and goddesses. They had military technology; bronze and iron swords and spears, bows and arrows, helmets and body armour, horse-drawn war chariots etc. Examples can be seen today in the British Museum. They were constantly at war with their neighbours. They certainly did not have their babies by yoga-power, without having sexual relations. They did not fly in vimans. It was not 'heaven'.

Just suppose for a moment that the 5000 Year Cycle is accurate. The Copper Age must start after 493 BC. That implies that Abraham must come to start the Jewish religion no earlier than 493 BC. But we know that the Middle-East was controlled by the Persians from the fall of Babylon to Cyrus in 539 BC, until the conquest of the Persian Empire by Alexander the Great in 336 - 323 BC. If Abraham had come in 493, the whole of Jewish History: Moses and the Exodus, the conquest of Canaan, the kings Saul, David and Solomon; the separate kingdoms of Judah and Israel, the conquest of Israel by Assyria, the Exile in Babylon, must all have happened between 493 and 323 BC - about 170 years. Impossible! In fact Cyrus released the Jews from their exile in Babylon in 538 BC, allowing them to return to Jerusalem and rebuild their Temple.

The 6th Century BC.

In 605 BC, Nebuchadnezzar became king of Babylon. He defeated the Egyptians at the battle of Carchemish in 605, and so inherited the former Assyrian empire. The Babylonian empire became the dominant power in the Middle-East. Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem in 597 BC, and deported the king Jehoiachin and all the ruling class of Jerusalem to Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar returned to Jerusalem ten years later, in 587, when he destroyed the city and King Solomon's Temple, and deported a second group of Jews into exile in Babylon. Their exile continued for about 50 more years, until Babylon fell to the Persian king, Cyrus, who allowed the Jews to return to Jerusalem, and to rebuild their Temple and the city (from 538 onwards). There was a major Persian Exhibition last two years ago at the British Museum. The 'Cyrus Cylinder', which records some of these events, was on display.

The Persian kings extended their empire westward into Asia Minor (Turkey), and clashed with the Greek colonies that were established there. A series of wars resulted between the Greeks and the Persians, which are well documented in Greek history. The Greeks defeated the Persians at the battle of Marathon in 490 BC. I read in 'The Times' that the Greeks are preparing to celebrate the 2500' anniversary of the battle of Marathon, in three years from now, in 2010.

The Persians were finally and decisively beaten at the naval battle of Salamis in 484 BC, which put an end to the westward expansion of the Persian empire. Meanwhile, the city-state of Rome was well-established by 500 BC, when after a dynasty of kings, the monarchy was overthrown and a republic set up.

All this is public knowledge, available to anyone with access to a public library, or to the Internet. If the Silver Age had existed in the 6t' Century B.C., it would imply that the last 'world emperor' of Rama and Sita's dynasty was ruling from a golden palace in Bharat simultaneously with all these Middle-Eastern kings, such as Nebuchadnezzar, who did not recognize him. Is this possible? Would not the lust and anger of the Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians etc. have brought the Silver Age to an end?

Furthermore, Baba has been interpreted as saying that at the time of 'vinash' (Destruction), all the continents of the earth will fuse together to form one single land of 'Bharat'. But if this were to happen, the reverse change would be necessary at the confluence of the Silver Age and the Copper Age, which as we have seen above, must come after 493 BC. It did not happen! The Mediterranean and Middle-Eastern lands had their present sea boundaries well before 1000 BC. The Exodus of the people of Israel from Egypt, and the Trojan War are dated by scholars at about 1250 BC.

I challenge any BK to explain to me why the scholars' view of history is wrong, and give me the evidence to support the BKs' concept of the 5000 Year Cycle. "Baba says ..." is not evidence. If extraordinary claims are made, extraordinary evidence is required. Why can we not send a trance messenger up to Baba to request a rational basis for his 5000 Year Cycle. If there is no rational basis, there can be no Cycle.

For each year that passes, the permissible boundary for the confluence between the Silver Age and the Copper Age must also move forward by one year, otherwise the Copper Age and the Iron Age together would be more than 2500 years. Next year, 2008, it will be 492 BC. In 2009 it will be 491 BC, and so on. There is absolutely no archaeological, historical or scientific evidence for a cataclysm in the 5th or 6th centuries BC, leading to the end of the 'Silver Age', and the beginning of the 'Copper Age'. It did not happen. The concept of the 5000 Year Cycle is really not credible.

Final Note.

So far I have been making the assumption that if 'vinash' or 'Destruction' were to come in 2007, the Golden Age would be dated from 2007, to give after 2500 years, the Copper Age beginning in 493 BC.

However I realise that time must be allowed, after 'vinash' for the 'Advance Party' to prepare for the Golden Age. Shri Krishna and Radhe have to be born and grow up. If the duration of the Confluence Age is reckoned as 100 years, from Baba's coming in 1936, to the Coronation of Lakshmi and Narayan in 2036, the formal inauguration of the Golden Age, which Baba calls 1.1.1., then the Silver Age must end, and the Copper Age begin in 464 BC. Now that really is ridiculous! (Socrates was born in 470 BC).

Don't you agree that there is no rational basis for the 5000 Year Cycle?
Online
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BKWSU

  • Posts: 9581
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Why I Cannot Believe in the Brahma Kumaris' 5,000 Years

Post11 Feb 2012

Dr Peter Iveson wrote:I read in 'The Times' that the Greeks are preparing to celebrate the 2500' anniversary of the battle of Marathon, in three years from now, in 2010.


Ha. We missed this. One of the most famous events in Western history. There are numerous websites dedicated to it, e.g marathon2500.org/. Please explain ...
2011 marks 2,500 years since the Battle of Marathon (Greece) in 490 BC ... the famous 26 mile run by Pheidippides from Marathon to Athens, and the meaning of the Athenian victory which gave Western Civilization time to flourish.

The 490 BC battle, in which the Athenian army defeated an invading band of Persians at the seaside plain of Marathon, was the first time that the Greeks had bested the Persians on land.

Historians argue that this victory was pivotal in the development of Western civilization because it preceded a flowering of Athenian culture that led to great advances in mathematics, drama, philosophy and astronomy.

The generally accepted date of the Battle of Marathon is 12 September 490 BC. This was proposed by the nineteenth century scholar August Boeckh, based on accounts written shortly after the battle by the Greek historian Herodotus who lived in the 5th century BC (c. 484 BC – c. 425 BC). He has been called the "Father of History", and was the first historian known to collect his materials systematically, test their accuracy to a certain extent and arrange them in a well-constructed and vivid narrative.


Offline
User avatar

Mr Green

ex-BK

  • Posts: 1856
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Why I Cannot Believe in the Brahma Kumaris' 5,000 Years

Post11 Feb 2012

The good doctor.
Offline

dany

  • Posts: 192
  • Joined: 11 May 2012

Re: Why I Cannot Believe in the Brahma Kumaris' 5,000 Years

Post02 Jul 2012

This is the right approach ... demolish BK ideology by presenting counter scientific facts ...!!
Offline

tommytommy

  • Posts: 7
  • Joined: 01 Jul 2012

Re: Why I Cannot Believe in the Brahma Kumaris' 5,000 Years

Post02 Jul 2012

Hiya Dany

I have only just registered and new to forum, but I have started with your post first, because I also have been researching this cycle and it does not add up with anything. I have been studying the Mayan calendar and cycles, I also cannot believe Baba is god, does anyone know who Baba is? Debbie
Offline

dany

  • Posts: 192
  • Joined: 11 May 2012

Re: Why I Cannot Believe in the Brahma Kumaris' 5,000 Years

Post02 Jul 2012

Debbie

The Mayan calendar ends on 23 Dec 2012, which could signal end of the world ..!

Some scientists argue that the Mayans ran out of material to engrave further dates on the calendar, so they just stopped there. Do not take that date seriously, go ahead and make Christmas arrangements as usual ...

I feel sorry for these religions and cults, such as BK, who voluntarily trap themselves in time limits and dates for end of the world, which fail them all the time ..!!
Offline

tommytommy

  • Posts: 7
  • Joined: 01 Jul 2012

Re: Why I Cannot Believe in the Brahma Kumaris' 5,000 Year C

Post03 Jul 2012

Dany I have been in every cult going haha, BK the first one then onto the New Age ones and, yes, nothing adds up anymore. I will enjoy Xmas and just so glad that I did not sell my soul to them, I never did find the truth lol ..
Offline

longtimeex

  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2012
  • Location: australia

Re: Why I Cannot Believe in the Brahma Kumaris' 5,000 Years

Post08 Nov 2012

I was a BK in oz 20 years ago. I have no real regrets and made some lifelong friends out of it. On the whole I had a great time. Anyhow I am finding this site to be fascinating especially this article about the 5,000 year cycle.

Has anyone put this to a PBK for comment? Or to a BK for comment?
Offline
User avatar

button slammer

PBK

  • Posts: 205
  • Joined: 17 Jul 2006

Re: Why I Cannot Believe in the Brahma Kumaris' 5,000 Years

Post17 Nov 2012

DEISM VS. ATHEISM

In George H. Smith's book ATHEISM - THE CASE AGAINST GOD, it is stated that rationality will not lead to God. That instead, God can only be brought about by rationalization. The book describes rationality as first finding evidence, then arriving at the idea, like Newton seeing the apple fall to the ground and then discovering the law of gravity. It then describes rationalization as first accepting an idea and then searching for evidence to support it, like someone inventing the idea of God and then saying God created the universe. Deism says it is rationality and reason that leads to God. To the Deist, the evidence is the creation and the idea of what brought about the evidence is the Creator. There is absolutely nothing known to man that created itself. For example, if someone shows us a computer, and tells us that all the individual parts that make up the computer just came about by chance, that they somehow just formed into a perfectly working computer system all by themselves, we would be foolish to believe that person. Reason, if we use it, won't let us believe a statement like that. Likewise, if someone tells us the ever growing creation and its perfect order "happened" by pure chance, we are under no obligation to believe them. From our own experience we know everything created has a creator. Why then should the creation itself be different? There is, however, one quality the creation has that makes leaving its existence to chance even more remote. That quality is motion.

The research of many scientists whose work challenges 'big bang/evolution' don't get their papers published in scientific journals as those journals are controlled by atheists.

The above link is independent research by a Christian scientist, who went on to create synthetic coal and oil within months. His research suggests the geographic environment may have occurred in a much shorter time frame than currently believed by the scientific community at present.

Big bang/evolution believes a random event approx 13.5 billion years ago led to another random event, of the creation of a simple cell/origin of life on earth. Is like saying the computer on your desk arranged itself out of myriads of components ... in perfect working order ... please.
Offline
User avatar

button slammer

PBK

  • Posts: 205
  • Joined: 17 Jul 2006

Re: Why I Cannot Believe in the Brahma Kumaris' 5,000 Years

Post17 Nov 2012

The research of many scientists whose work challenges 'big bang/evolution' don't get their papers published in scientific journals as those journals are controlled by atheists.


The above link is independent research by a Christian scientist, who went on to create synthetic coal and oil within months. His research suggests the geographic environment may have occurred in a much shorter time frame than currently believed by the scientific community at present.

Big bang/evolution believes a random event approx 13.5 billion years ago led to another random event, of the creation of a simple cell/origin of life on earth. Is like saying the computer on your desk arranged itself out of myriads of components ... in perfect working order ... please.
Offline

ex.brahma

  • Posts: 79
  • Joined: 02 Aug 2012

Re: Why I Cannot Believe in the Brahma Kumaris' 5,000 Years

Post18 Nov 2012

The earth planet we are living on, is meant to accommodate and cater for humans of different generations for a specific period only.

Science have established that minerals essential for human needs and survival, deposited in the earth subsoil, such as oil, gas and other minerals tooke millions of years to formulate and materialise, and are not renewables.

How would this fact match with the endless 5,000 year cycle?
Online
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BKWSU

  • Posts: 9581
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Why I Cannot Believe in the Brahma Kumaris' 5,000 Years

Post18 Nov 2012

ex.Brahma wrote:... oil, gas and other minerals took millions of years to formulate and materialise, and are not renewables. How would this fact match with the endless 5,000 year cycle?

I have often asked rational questions such as this, e.g. "how do the burnt hydrocarbons of the oil and coal get removed from the atmosphere and trees where they now exist and replaced back under the soil to where they were found" or "how does all the metal sent up in space exploration get returned to where it was?" ... but at the end of the day, the god of the BKs and its adherents have no answers. It's magic wand territory. Try and be logical and you are brushed aside sanctimoniously as being a buddhu (idiot) for asking. Blind faith and subservience to the BK Seniors are what count the most.
button slammer wrote:Big bang/evolution believes a random event approx 13.5 billion years ago led to another random event, of the creation of a simple cell/origin of life on earth. Is like saying the computer on your desk arranged itself out of myriads of components ... in perfect working order ... please.

It's a strange day when the 5,000 year Brahma Kumaris get into bed with the 6,000 year "stone intellect", "body conscious", "ignorant", "science proud", "incomplete", "Yadava" fundamentalist Christians to prove their point ... especially given that these Christians must only one or a few births old according to The Knowledge, given they have their own cult called "Young Earth creationism". This specific individual is a Seventh Day Adventists.

Is it not "parmat" (worthless opinion of others) from lowly Kali Yugi souls?

These individuals depend not on science for their theories but a literal interpretation of the chronology of the Jewish history within the Old Testament (Bible) which states God created the Earth, perfect and complete, in six 24-hour days. They then date that event backwards believing that men such as Adam who actually existed and died at the age of 930, 912 (Seth) 910 (Kenan), 895 (Mahalalel), 962 (Jared) and so on. And that they had children aged 130 years old etc ... all of which completely contradicts The Knowledge as it happened in the Copper Age less then 2,500 years ago according to the BKs.

How can the BKs use theories which completely contradict The Knowledge to support it?

Aren't the BKs proving a different point from the Christians? The Christians want to prove the Bible is true and Jewish god waved a magic wand and brewed up the universe from his breath, whereas the BK god did none of that.

The god of the BKs, they claim, made nothing and did nothing physical. For the BKs Heaven on Earth is the beginning just magically existed. Full Stop.

In fact, BK creationism is even weirder and more mysterious than Christian creationism. Their god has no explanation at all for how the universe and evolution happened at all. He and the leaders of the cult leave the question entirely open to the speculations of the mainly male adherents. It's seen as a kind of "Brother's Maya" (illusion) because the superior Sisters don't question and just have "faith".

There is a rebuttal to many of the arguments of the Young Creationists, here. Sorry to say it, bottom slammer, but as I suspect your post is just a 'hit and run' attack and you don't really want to discuss the issue, I am not going to get into the discussion of the facts ...

However, I am interested by the cultic techniques being used here.

Mainly it's the "uncertainty tactic".

The victims of such arguments are usually entirely uneducated in science. They don't know how science works, they don't understand its language; frankly, they might even be frightened by it and egotistically intimidated by its practitioners. They start 99% from wanting to believe in whatever cockamanie they have been fed by their blind gurus. Whereas scientists are smart, intellectual and extremely rational; most religionists would be happier back in the Middle Ages or living in an imaginary Harry Potter Land.

All the proponents of cult religions have to do is seed doubts in their minds to win over the last 1%, e.g. "Science was wrong before".

Then you have the "false dichotomy"; the simplistic black and white world of cult adherence, a binary way of "right" and "wrong" thinking. Guru is "right" (and does not need to substantiate their claims because they are god and they say so); everyone else is "wrong" (and any hint of doubt or 'work in progress' is proof of that).

Then there is the "Backfire effect", when, in the face of contradictory evidence, beliefs get stronger. They claim "scientists said so, so it must be true", ignoring that even people with a science degree can be loopy Christians and a science degree does not give you the authority to be an expert in all fields.

All the one million plus member, 75 year old, multi-million dollar funded Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University has to do is produce O-N-E peer reviewed scientific paper explaining their beliefs and proving them ... and I will eat this website, and believe them. It's funny who they have never done so.

If anyone is interested, there is a huge repository of responses to those supporting Biblical Creationism, here: talkorigins.org.

For me, personally, the entire debate has no relevance to my daily life. It's a futile argument to get involved with a "believer". No common sense, logic or rational evidence is going to change a "believer" mindset. Common sense, logic or rational reasoning are antipathic (a strong feeling of aversion or repugnance) for "believers". Ignorance is a badge of pride for them and to "disbelieve" in science is "proof" of their faith. The more they disbelieve in it, the more faith the have; they want more faith and so they must make effort to disbelief more.


Life is a highly random and wonderful miracle. Enjoy as much of it as you can whilst you can, you don't need a god to do so. Be thankful for it ... and please try and leave it as you found it so that others can enjoy it after you die.
Offline
User avatar

button slammer

PBK

  • Posts: 205
  • Joined: 17 Jul 2006

Re: Why I Cannot Believe in the Brahma Kumaris' 5,000 Years

Post21 Nov 2012

ex.Brahma wrote:... oil, gas and other minerals took millions of years to formulate and materialise, and are not renewables. How would this fact match with the endless 5,000 year cycle?

The scientist mentioned above has described several scenarios whereby the production of fossil fuels takes place in a significantly reduced time, i.e. minus hundreds of millions of years.
It's a strange day when the 5,000 year Brahma Kumaris get into bed with the 6,000 year "stone intellect", "body conscious", "ignorant", "science proud", "incomplete", "Yadava" fundamentalist Christians to prove their point ... l]". This specific individual is a Seventh Day Adventists.

If anyone has stone intellect it is souls of the deity religion. Christians have fewer birth around The Cycle so their intellect is sharper. I can appreciate the rationale and presentation of ideas from any individual, or group. Personally I am unfettered by any intellectual restraints. I am a 'Free Agent', besides, as you're using Brahmin terminology it's clear that your understanding of just who the 'Yadava' are is incorrect. Deity souls are at large in the 'outer world' and reveal themselves by their attitude, just as destructive/atheist souls who have emerged from the Yagya reveal themselves.

Is it not "parmat" (worthless opinion of others) from lowly Kali Yugi souls? No.
These individuals depend not on science for their theories but a literal interpretation of the chronology of the Jewish history within the Old Testament (Bible) which states God created the Earth, perfect and complete, in six 24-hour days. They then date that event backwards believing that men such as Adam who actually existed and died at the age of 930, 912 (Seth) 910 (Kenan), 895 (Mahalalel), 962 (Jared) and so on. And that they had children aged 130 years old etc ... all of which completely contradicts The Knowledge as it happened in the Copper Age less then 2,500 years ago according to the BKs.

The above is competely irrelevant to the observations made by the scientist.
How can the BKs use theories which completely contradict The Knowledge to support it?

In what way does an experiment and observations (as above) refute Gyan?
Aren't the BKs proving a different point from the Christians? The Christians want to prove the Bible is true and Jewish god waved a magic wand and brewed up the universe from his breath, whereas the BK god did none of that

The above Christian scientist is claiming nothing of the kind. He is refuting Big Bang and evolutionary theory. Many geographical anomalies have been recorded that don't get widespread publication by the scientific communities because atheists control the publishing houses and funding offices.
The god of the BKs, they claim, made nothing and did nothing physical. For the BKs Heaven on Earth is the beginning just magically existed. Full Stop

In the basic knowledge it is taught, ''thoughts, words, and ACTION. All this takes place on a corporeal level. Knowledge of the Soul, Supreme Soul, Drama. The dissemination of knowledge and the practice of virtues. It is not a magic wand, and requires effort to change anything. Nothing happens by itself. you are egotistically negating vast areas of information on the topic in order to demean and ridicule the topic, (a cultic practice you accuse the BKs of).
In fact, BK creationism is even weirder and more mysterious than Christian creationism. Their god has no explanation at all for how the universe and evolution happened at all. He and the leaders of the cult leave the question entirely open to the speculations of the mainly male adherents. It's seen as a kind of "Brother's Maya" (illusion) because the superior Sisters don't question and just have "faith".

Much explanation has been given the extent to which it's understood is another. The basis for the rotation of the entire universe and the expansion of the human race is given in a single word ...? Other readers may think on this.

I am not going to get into the discussion of the facts ...
However, I am interested by the cultic techniques being used here.

Yes, your own atheist propaganda has been noted.
Mainly it's the "uncertainty tactic".

Is a principle you are using yourself to establish your atheist religion.
The victims of such arguments are usually entirely uneducated in science. They don't know how science works, they don't understand its language; frankly, they might even be frightened by it and egotistically intimidated by its practitioners. They start 99% from wanting to believe in whatever cockamanie they have been fed by their blind gurus. Whereas scientists are smart, intellectual and extremely rational; most religionists would be happier back in the Middle Ages or living in an imaginary Harry Potter Land.

Mostly blithering here/smokescreen.
Then you have the "false dichotomy"; the simplistic black and white world of cult adherence, a binary way of "right" and "wrong" thinking. Guru is "right" (and does not need to substantiate their claims because they are god and they say so); everyone else is "wrong" (and any hint of doubt or 'work in progress' is proof of that)
.
So what, in the PBK world everything has to be proved regardless.
Then there is the "Backfire effect", when, in the face of contradictory evidence, beliefs get stronger. They claim "scientists said so, so it must be true", ignoring that even people with a science degree can be loopy Christians and a science degree does not give you the authority to be an expert in all fields.

Again, any ideas that challenge the establishment/pharmaceutical/industrial/psychological/media/millitary/educational/cult is by necessity crushed and eradicated by any means possible.
All the one million plus member, 75 year old, multi-million dollar funded Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University has to do is produce O-N-E peer reviewed scientific paper explaining their beliefs and proving them ... and I will eat this website, and believe them

Noted.
For me, personally, the entire debate has no relevance to my daily life. It's a futile argument to get involved with a "believer". No common sense, logic or rational evidence is going to change a "believer" mindset. Common sense, logic or rational reasoning are antipathic (a strong feeling of aversion or repugnance) for "believers". Ignorance is a badge of pride for them and to "disbelieve" in science is "proof" of their faith. The more they disbelieve in it, the more faith the have; they want more faith and so they must make effort to disbelief more.

But the above reasoning is entirely rational, you have just obfuscated the issue. You entirely missed the point of the presentation by Thomas Paine. What is motion?
Life is a highly random and wonderful miracle. Enjoy as much of it as you can whilst you can, you don't need a god to do so. Be thankful for it ... and please try and leave it as you found it so that others can enjoy it after you die.

A random world is hell.
Offline

ex.brahma

  • Posts: 79
  • Joined: 02 Aug 2012

Re: Why I Cannot Believe in the Brahma Kumaris' 5,000 Years

Post21 Nov 2012

No one can argue nor dispute that Oil, Gas and Minerals deposited in the earth subsoil, and taking millions of years to formulate and materialise, are essential for human survival and continuity of life on earth, but can be consumed within certain period of time, and are ... NOT RENEWABLES.

Can any BK master mind explain, how would the 5,000 year cycles continue repeating on the same earth planet, ENDLESSLY, in the absence of such vital life resources?

Magic stick explanations not accepted!
Online
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BKWSU

  • Posts: 9581
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Why I Cannot Believe in the Brahma Kumaris' 5,000 Years

Post21 Nov 2012

Good point ex-Brahma. Even if the coal and oil resource *could* be remade in months, they would still take an equivalent influx of new energy from somewhere which is not accounted for in the BK model.

The BKs have 100s of scientists and engineers and multi-million dollars to commission experts. Why in 75 years could they not produce one scientific paper explaining how, e.g. light returns backwards to the exact point it was 5,000 years ago, never mind the entire universe re-wind identically. Honestly, someone please just explain how or by what mechanism the clock ticks to a stop at 5,000 years precisely.

It's not a scientific theory. It's not even a myth or a legend. It's a conman's trick to filter out the gullible and naive in order to exploit them for money, free labour, land and property.

Have you never been approached by a conman in real life, e.g. a Nigerian bank fraud? It's what they do ... tell a big lie or story in the first place and if you are stupid enough to swallow it, go on to exploit you. There's a strange mechanism in some individuals minds where, even after they have been exploited, they keep going back time and time again just because 'this time' they believe they will win or succeed. Many have lost their complete family's wealth in this way.

As for Robert V Gentry, he has had scientific papers publish, so that sink that conspiracy theory.

He was one of a number of born-again Christians who tried to force the American education system to teach Biblical Creationism on an equal footing with science at public schools in the USA ... and lost because it was religion not science.

I am sorry button slammer but the story of Biblical creation and the ages of the Jewish patriarch are pertinent because it is the framework these people work from. Their logical is, "God says in the Bible that the Bible is true and the Earth was created 6,000 years ago (*approx)", therefore they look for way to fit everything into that timescale.

Gentry has been caught out on his science making false claims and statements, and there is nothing new about synthetic fuels. Scientist have been making them since the 1920s.

I say "approximately" because even the Biblical Creationists do not agree with each other exactly when. They do, however, claim the world was created in 6 days what is the BK/PBK explanation?
Next

Return to Classic Posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests