Are we in 1719?

[Aaronjs0005]

https://h2g2.com/approved_entry/A85654957" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

According to a growing number of writers and scholars Otto III added 297 yrs to the calendar. Obviously, this is very hard to believe, but it does make you wonder if any yrs were added, say 50. Please read the article I linked and let me know your thoughts, since a lot of you are more knowledgeable and smarter than I am. You'll be able to offer me a better rebuttal than I can for myself. Thanks

[BeNotDeceived]

There may be one-year unaccounted for i.e 1830 isn't 1830 years from 1 AD which is considered the birth year of our Redeemer per discussion in my 2030 adjusted to 2031 thread leading to the statement "7 years of prosperity will begin the first week of April 2017, followed by 7 years of devastation" which aligns with the effection of the current president per discussions to be discovered elsewhere on this website.

[Matchmaker]

That was an interesting article. I wouldn't be surprised if there had been some tampering somewhere.

[cyclOps]

Maybe it was tampered with by the same people that tell us the world is round. Now that we believe the world is round and it's the year 2017, they have us right where they want us...

[Silver]

Maybe it was tampered with by the same people that tell us the world is round. Now that we believe the world is round and it's the year 2017, they have us right where they want us...

Your comment is laugh-out-loud funny. Thanks for cheering up my morning.

I just gotta ask: Who is they?
You can tell me this year or 297 years from now. Your choice.

[Robin Hood]

This theory certainly supports my position that the second coming could be 300 years away.

[cappaccio]

Though we do have genealogical records linking Charlemagne to living people.

http://search.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/sse. ... harlemagne" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I didn't read the entire artcle, just saw the mention of Charlemagne being fictitious and I'm not so sure about that.

[cyclOps]

Maybe it was tampered with by the same people that tell us the world is round. Now that we believe the world is round and it's the year 2017, they have us right where they want us...

Your comment is laugh-out-loud funny. Thanks for cheering up my morning.

I just gotta ask: Who is they?
You can tell me this year or 297 years from now. Your choice.

The age old question!

[EmmaLee]

59445674.jpg (112.83 KiB) Viewed 667 times

[EmmaLee]

As to the topic - this is an interesting read. Not saying I believe it, but it was interesting for sure - https://www.amazon.com/History-mathemat ... ds=fomenko" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Blurb - "History: Fiction or Science? is the most explosive tractate on history ever written - however, every theory it contains, no matter how unorthodox, is backed by solid scientific data. The book is well-illustrated, contains over 446 graphs and illustrations, copies of ancient manuscripts, and countless facts attesting to the falsity of the chronology used nowadays, which never cease to amaze the reader. Eminent mathematician proves that: Jesus Christ was born in 1153 and crucified in 1186 The Old Testament refers to mediaeval events. Apocalypse was written after 1486. Does this sound uncanny? This version of events is substantiated by hard facts and logic - validated by new astronomical research and statistical analysis of ancient sources - to a greater extent than everything you may have read and heard about history before. The dominating historical discourse in its current state was essentially crafted in the XVI century from a rather contradictory jumble of sources such as innumerable copies of ancient Latin and Greek manuscripts whose originals had vanished in the Dark Ages and the allegedly irrefutable proof offered by late mediaeval astronomers, resting upon the power of ecclesial authorities. Nearly all of its components are blatantly untrue! For some of us, it shall possibly be quite disturbing to see the magnificent edifice of classical history to turn into an ominous simulacrum brooding over the snake pit of mediaeval politics. Twice so, in fact: the first seeing the legendary millenarian dust on the ancient marble turn into a mere layer of dirt - one that meticulous unprejudiced research can eventually remove. The second, and greater, attack of unease comes with the awareness of just how many areas of human knowledge still trust the three elephants of the consensual chronology to support them. Nothing can remedy that except for an individual chronological revolution happening in the minds of a large enough number of people."

[brianj]

In the Doctrine and Covenants we can read a revelation received on the day the church was formally organized wherein the Savior mentions it is 1,830 years since His birth. Based on that, I don't think we are living in any other year than 2017. Of course others disagree, but I don't know the reasoning that supports their conclusion the 1,830 years statement is not literal.

[BeNotDeceived]

In the Doctrine and Covenants we can read a revelation received on the day the church was formally organized wherein the Savior mentions it is 1,830 years since His birth. Based on that, I don't think we are living in any other year than 2017. Of course others disagree, but I don't know the reasoning that supports their conclusion the 1,830 years statement is not literal.

Seems we're unable to agree per this article. @-)

... During 2012, Ronald P. Millett came to the defense of Elder Talmage (with whom Sidney B. Sperry also agreed) by posting two articles on the Meridian Magazine web site. Like many Latter-day Saints he assumes that the source was revelatory, because (1) Jesus the Christ was authored by an apostle, (2) who wrote the book under commission from the First Presidency,
(3) wrote it in the Salt Lake Temple, and (4) it was published by the Church. I believe that these reasons deserve some comment.

As regards Elder Talmage’s apostleship, four other apostles (Orson Pratt, Hyrum Smith, J. Reuben Clark Jr. of the First Presidency, and Bruce R. McConkie) discussed the matter. Of these, Elder Smith, who published his Doctrine and Covenants commentary four years after Talmage’s book, agreed on the date of 6 April, but rejected Talmage’s assertion about 1 bc being the year in which Christ was born. The other three disagreed entirely with Talmage. Like Jesus the Christ, Clark’s Our Lord of the Gospels (1954) was reprinted by the Church as the Melchizedek Priesthood handbook for 1958. ... http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/when-was-christ-born/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Making it difficult to precisely peg 2000 years per the parable of the Good Samaritan, however 7 year good/bad periods align with the effection of our current president, and a time (April 2014) when political infighting will boil over per ideas expressed in the Hancock Prophecy. The bad seven years complete April 3031, then what happens from there assuming we survive to see it?

.