What is the author's true intention behind this book?

[jaym_tan]

I think his aim was to present the findings of his scientific and biblical studies which took a lot of work. He definitely gathered information about the beginning of the universe up until the end times. With this studies, he was able to establish claims that are worth discussing.

[Sushan Ekanayake]

I believe the point of the book is to showcase the importance of both science and religion and the role of each in figuring out life. I also think both fields are valid, and the author's aim is to widen one's perspectives to 'what if'.

This 'what if' factor is important to develop hypotheses, but then they have to be tested and either approved or disapproved. But here this author tries to just prove few 'what if' facts and give a legitimacy for the biblical stories, which some believe but some do not. He is trying to show a co-relation between science and religion, but as I see, that is merely to give the religion a scientific validity

[Sushan Ekanayake]

The author is trying to bring Science and religion together for a better understanding of the world. However, I see that his argument inclines more towards religion than science. To an extend, I agree with him because personally, I have never envisioned the two coming together effectively. Science will always contradict religion to a larger extend because one is based on factual information while the other is based on faith in God.

That is what I try to say. How can we have reconciliation between two different things. Many want to see similarities between science and religion, yet they are based on different things and their purposes are different. In that case why anyone would want to reconcile them? We can use both seperately for seperate purposes.

With his inclination towards religion, this author tries to give religion a scientific value, which is unnecessary aa well as undue in my opinion

[ReaderAisha2020]

I think he wanted to demonstrate that religion and science can support each other and religion is not in contradiction to science. He shows that religious scholars made a lot of effort to try and find scientific explanations and explanations for religious teachings

[Sushan Ekanayake]

I think his aim was to present the findings of his scientific and biblical studies which took a lot of work. He definitely gathered information about the beginning of the universe up until the end times. With this studies, he was able to establish claims that are worth discussing.

Well, he wanted to present what he found, yet not just present but to convince the reader regarding the legitimacy of various religious stories. Otherwise he could have just remained unbiased and shown that there are occasions where religious teachings are not scientific. Instead of that, he has gone to the extent to say that scientists have seen and found things in such a way because the God wanted that in that way. That is purely biased and not suitable for a research paper

[Sushan Ekanayake]

I think he wanted to demonstrate that religion and science can support each other and religion is not in contradiction to science. He shows that religious scholars made a lot of effort to try and find scientific explanations and explanations for religious teachings

Yes, the scholars have put a significant effort to show that religious beliefs are scientific, but why? Why have they tried to reconcile a two seperate subjects which has nothing to do with each other? That is simply because to keep those who were leaving religion with the increasing scientific knowledge. So they wanted to show that religion is science too. Seemingly this author has done nothing different, but an extension of the work of those scholars, with the intention of showing the legitimacy of religion

[Huini Hellen]

I think we cannot downplay the author's motivation as a sole attempt to impose religion on the readers, but an effort to bring an understanding of the religious interpretation of events.

[rondanoh1]

I think we can only know what his true intention was from what he tells us. We can't really know what someone else intends.

[63tty]

I think his opinion is valid. Their research seems to point more towards religion I believe, so I would agree. Although there is the aspect of science and global warming which predicts the world would end sooner rather than later, and I don't see that happening soon.

Global warming was there for few decades now. And the world leaders took various effective as well as non effective attempts to slow down its process. But so far we don't see any military attempt to grab some other country's technology to fight against that. Maybe that is because no one has found such a technology. And if the author wanted to warn people about such a fate, did he really think that a single book can change the way that a whole world is going?

So, as I see, he has merely attempted to legitimize his religious beliefs (I am sorry if I am challenging your beliefs, and I don't mean any disrespect), which has not been proven or supported by scientific evidence so far

No worries, I like a challenge and I'm not offended. But, according to me, the reason I say that I believe him is because the Bible does not give a specific time of when the world will end. That's the beauty of it. I don't agree with him giving specific dates or years. Also, yes i dont see where science proves him right but neither does sciense say when exactly the world would end. I choose to believe the Bible till the world proves it wrong.

[kdstrack]

I agree that the author wanted to present the results of his years of study trying to determine the age of the Earth which will indicate the End of Days. This will also help to prepare for the arrival of the Messiah as he does not believe that the Jesus of the Bible is the Messiah. The requirement he describes is that the Messiah be a political leader who will defeat all the nations, build the sanctuary, and gather the dispersed of Israel.

[Mtibza eM]

The author, according to me, has failed. He didn't reconcile bother the Science and religion. Instead he leaned more on the latter than the former.

[Caroline Anne Richmond]

I think the author has tried to research both religious and scientific ideas and bring them closer together. Often people will go in one specific direction and not consider the other, so I think the author has been quite unique in bringing a harmony between the two and trying to logically understand scripture and science.

[John Owen]

The obvious role of authors is and has been to share their views, and in this case the author tries to justify that whatever happens in the Bible has been a kind of clock and just as hours and minutes repeat each day, so do events repeat.

[63tty]

The question I asked myself was: Given that the Bible claims there is a plan for human history, can we see the plan now that so much history has elapsed? And if we can can we extrapolate it forward?
My intention behind the book was to try to present facts and let you decide. In terms of the End of Days the approach is to put down actual historical events that have happened on the timeline they happened. Then go to Biblical sources to extract the Bibles "plan" for history and compare it with the actual events. Once the match is obvious (for you to decide if it is) extrapolate to the future and compare with the prophecies. Then you as the reader can see if you agree they match. I have used biblical sources like Isaiah accepted by Christianity and Judaism, but when I needed more explanation i went to Jewish commentaries- because its taken me a lifetime to learn some of those.

It sounds like some calculations to me but you have explained well. I don't think people get that it takes heaps of research to come to such conclusions. And most people have not even read through any of these reference materials(I know I have not). They all base it on their common knowledge and that is why there are do many opinions. Even I dispute some but I acknowledge your research.

[Saint Bruno]

There's no doubt that the author seems biased in his analysis. He seems to forget that religion mostly relies on faith while science takes a rather parallel approach. However, I think his goal is to use scientific facts that support his theory to support his beliefs.