Is the Mayan End of the World Prophecy Accurate?

Is the Mayan End of the World Prophecy Accurate?

Getty Images

Thanks to their interpretation of the Mayan calendar, many people think the world will end on December 21, 2012. What is the basis of their faith?

Is the world about to end? Nearly one in seven people worldwide say it will happen in their lifetime, a recent poll shows.

It’s not exactly crazy to think so. Weather upsets, economic instability, signs of societal breakdown and a tottering world order all make regular news.

What is crazy, though, is this: A great many people apparently base their apocalyptic fears on a supposed prophecy contained on ruins of a pre-Hispanic civilization in Mexico. That same poll indicates that one in 10 earthlings believe the Mayan calendar could mean civilization as we know it is crashing down this year.

It’s a bizarre belief that has been around since a stone tablet was found in the 1960s at a Mexican archeological site that describes a Mayan god returning at the end of a time cycle believed to be Dec. 21, 2012. Last November, an additional Mayan artifact was found with apparently the same date mentioned, fueling additional hype. Various Mayan ruins have drawn a surge in tourism this year to the tune of tens of millions of people.

Breathless stories fill the Internet about unusual geographic or astronomical activity associated with the prophecy: a shift in Earth’s rotational axis—violent solar flares—curious planetary alignments—catastrophic earthquakes and/or tidal events. One story has an invisible planet named Nibiru spinning into our solar system and colliding with ours. Hollywood has capitalized on the buzz with big-budget, special-effects-laden disaster films like 2012 (“Mankind’s earliest civilization warned us this day would come,” the trailer says).

The predictions of calamity are offset by other, more hopeful—and even wackier—interpretations of the prophecy: that December 21 is more a new beginning than an end; that life will go on, but differently, in some kind of new spiritual phase; that spiritually and technologically advanced extraterrestrials will revitalize the planet and educate humankind in the ways of peace.

Cooler heads have been exposing the flaws in these theories. They have revealed misunderstandings of the prophecy and its culture of origin. Popular conflation of Mayan and Aztec cultures has added to the confusion. nasa weighed in with scientific proof that there will be no unusual astronomical alignments or collisions with imaginary planets, and that the worst effects of a pole shift would be that we’d have to recalibrate our compasses.

Nevertheless, people cling to falsehoods. “I 100 percent believe it,” says one man of his golden-age-ushered-in-by-spacemen theory. “Five years ago I was a skeptic, but this is not conspiracy theory, it is conspiracy fact.”

Here’s a question: Why did so many people suddenly put so much stock in the supposed wisdom of the ancient Mayans?

How in the world could a group of people a millennium and a half ago make such a prophecy accurately? However impressive their mathematics or astronomy skills, how could they predict a collision between planets so far in the future—particularly since one of them has yet to be detected? What shred of evidence is there that Bolon Yokte, the god who is supposed to return in December, even exists?

What in the world is the basis for people’s faith in this prophecy?

Forget etchings on a few stones in Mexico. There is only one reliable, verifiable source of prophecy that has a proven track record of accuracy: the Holy Bible.

This is the most accurately copied and painstakingly preserved book from ancient times we have. It is totally unique among other so-called sacred texts: It purports to be the infallible revelation of truth given by the Creator and Ruler of the universe. It repeatedly quotes this Being claiming to be God, speaking in the first person—and actually asserting that He alone has the power of prophecy.

And what is the basis of that power? It’s not just good guessing. It is divine omnipotence: the power to proclaim major, earthshaking events in advance of their happening—and then to actually bring them to pass, even millennia later!

Did a human being write this? “I am God, and there is none like me, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand.”

That is quite a boast. The Being who uttered these prophecies has put His reputation on the line!

I strongly encourage you to read our free booklet The Proof of the Bible. It details several cases in history where biblical prophecies came to pass exactly.

Prophecy is, in fact, a most compelling proof God offers both of His existence and of the Bible’s veracity and authority. His Word never fails. True Bible prophecy is 100 percent reliable.

As Jesus Christ said in the midst of His famous Olivet prophecy, “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.” On another occasion He said, “The scripture cannot be broken.” Jesus also said, “I have told you before it come to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye might believe.”

Prophecy shows that God is in control. He is ensuring that certain events transpire precisely according to His master plan—even to the point of setting up and toppling kings, making and unmaking nations! Only the Almighty God has the power to do so. He does everything with purpose. He has an ambition—and the will to see it through. The essential message of prophecy is that God rules.

Did you know that, in fact, fully one third of this best-selling book in history is devoted to prophecy?

It includes prophecies of the rise and fall of future cities, nations, empires—of successions of eras and epochs—and, yes, even of the end of our present civilization and its replacement with a better, more peaceful one.

Mayan beliefs may contain echoes of these prophecies, but the Bible is the genuine article.

Do the people expressing faith in the Mayan calendar really believe in the almighty power of Bolon Yokte?

The God of the Bible actually challenges anyone out there to do what He has done. “Now, the Eternal cries, bring your case forward, … state your proofs. Let us hear what happened in the past, that we may ponder it, or show me what is yet to be, that we may watch how it turns out; yes, let us hear what is coming, that we may be sure you are gods; come, do something or other that we may marvel at the sight!—why, you are things of naught, you can do nothing at all!” (Isaiah 41:21-24; Moffatt translation).

When December 21 rolls around this year, the Mayan prophecy will fail and be exposed as a fraud.

However, do not let that shake your faith in the one source of true prophecy! Jesus Christ gave specific signs—not a date, not an hour, but descriptions of general conditions and particular events—for His followers to watch for signaling the end of this age. Those signs are all around us! “When ye shall see all these things,” He said, “know that it is near, even at the doors. … Watch therefore, for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.”

Muslim Brotherhood: The genie is unleashed

FrontPage Magazine is reporting: Calls to destroy Egypt’s great pyramids begin. Following the election of Egypt’s new Prime Minister Mohammed Morsi, prominent Muslim clerics have begun to call for the demolition of Egypt’s “pagan” monuments—including the Great Pyramids. Will Morsi complete the Islamization process that multiple past Muslim rulers were unable to?

According to several reports in the Arabic media, prominent Muslim clerics have begun to call for the demolition of Egypt’s Great Pyramids—or, in the words of Saudi Sheikh Ali bin Said al-Rabi’i, those “symbols of paganism,” which Egypt’s Salafi party has long planned to cover with wax. Most recently, Bahrain’s “sheikh of Sunni sheikhs” and president of National Unity, Abd al-Latif al-Mahmoud, called on Egypt’s new president, Mohammed Morsi, to “destroy the pyramids and accomplish what the Sahabi Amr bin al-As could not.”This is a reference to the Muslim Prophet Mohammed’s companion, Amr bin al-As, and his Arabian tribesmen, who invaded and conquered Egypt circa 641. Under al-As and subsequent Muslim rule, many Egyptian antiquities were destroyed as relics of infidelity. … [A]ccording to early Muslim writers, the great Library of Alexandria itself—deemed a repository of pagan knowledge contradicting the Koran—was destroyed under bin al-As’s reign and in compliance with Caliph Omar’s command.However, while book-burning was an easy activity in the seventh century, destroying the mountain-like pyramids and their guardian Sphinx was not—even if Egypt’s Medieval Mamluk rulers “de-nosed” the latter during target practice ….

With the invention of dynamite, nitroglycerine, bunker busters and other modern explosives, the pyramids can now be destroyed.

If you think that such action is farfetched, consider that this is exactly what is happening in Mali, where today Islamist insurgents destroyed two tombs at the famous 14th-century world heritage Djingareyber mosque in Timbuktu. Islamists said the centuries-old shrines of a version of Islam were idolatrous. Reuters reports:

About a dozen militants arrived in an armored four-wheel-drive truck, armed with pickaxes and hoes. They fired in the air to intimidate people and started smashing the tombs, said Ibrahim Cisse, who witnessed the scene. …The new destruction comes after attacks last week on other historic and religious landmarks in Timbuktu that unesco called “wanton destruction.”They have destroyed at least eight of 16 listed mausoleums in the city, together with a number of tombs and a sacred door at Sidi Yahya mosque, in their campaign to erase traces of what they regard as un-Islamic idolatry.

Actually, history is filled with examples of Muslims destroying their own pre-Islamic heritage. The prophet Mohammed himself was known for destroying temples to build mosques. More recently, the Taliban destroyed dozens of massive Buddha that were carved into the sides of mountains in Afghanistan.

It is very telling that the calls for the destruction of the pyramids come so shortly after the election of Mohammed Morsi. As was reported in a separate piece today, Morsi’s call for America to release the sheikh terrorist who masterminded the 1993 World Trade Center bombings in New York City is just one of the first signs of Egypt’s turn toward radicalism. FrontPage Magazine sums up:

From calls to legalize Islamic sex-slave marriage to calls to institute “morality police” to calls to destroy Egypt’s mountain-like monuments, under Muslim Brotherhood tutelage, the bottle has been uncorked, and the genie unleashed in Egypt.

The genie is out of the bottle and, as we reported yesterday, astoundingly, America has no interest in putting him back in. In this video, Gerald Flurry explains why America should not have toppled Mubarak.

Mexican Police, Gunmen Killed in Firefight

Seven Mexican state police officers and four gunmen died in a clash on Monday in the Pacific coast state of Sinaloa.

The officers were traveling on a road near the town of El Fuerte when a group of gunmen ambushed them. The police returned fire during the attack, killing four of the assailants. Local media said one of the slain gunmen was a lieutenant for the Beltran Leyva drug gang. The area has suffered under a recent surge in violence between members of the Beltran Leyva gang and their former allies in the powerful Sinaloa drug cartel.

As cartels battle each other, the police and the military, parts of Mexico are becoming war zones. In the past six years, drug-related violence in Mexico has claimed the lives of more than 47,000 people. In 2006, there were just over 2,000 cartel-related murders. In 2010, there were more than 15,000. Approximately 17,000 died in 2011.

Americans continue to consume massive amounts of narcotics, sending an estimated $40 billion a year to the Mexican drug cartels. The war continues to rage on, and the violence is spilling across the border into the United States. To understand what is causing the drug war and how it will be stopped, read our article “Beheading Mexico.”

Australia—Girl Guides Eliminate God and the Queen

Australia—Girl Guides Eliminate God and the Queen

Getty Images

In yet another encroachment of feminist liberal social doctrine on a once worthy institution, the Australian Girl Guides take God and the Queen out of their vision.

In the great years of the British Empire, Lord Baden Powell established two worthy movements for youth that were destined to positively impact the development of many young people worldwide. They were the Boy Scouts and the Girl Guides.

Fundamental to those institutions was a pledge by their members to demonstrate allegiance to God, king and country.

Those liberal feminists who, akin to their efforts to influence women’s movements globally with their far-too-often godless, lesbian agenda, having seized control of the Girl Guide movement in Australia have now expunged any reference to God and the Queen from the movement’s pledge.

The Australian Broadcasting Commission program A.M. reports that “For more than 40 years Australian Girl Guides have promised to do their duty to God and serve the Queen. However, the pledge is about to change. In an effort to be more inclusive, the references to God and the Queen are being ditched. Instead, the young recruits will promise to do their best to be true to themselves and develop their beliefs …” (July 9).

Helen Geard, chief commissioner for Girl Guides in Australia, declared in reference to this decision, “For some of our members it was a sticking point for them because they had made a personal promise to God and felt that we should continue to use God, but what we found in the surveys and the extensive consultation that we did, that doing duty to God is probably not language that is relevant to our young people.”

What Ms. Geard failed to mention is the fact that the reason that “doing duty to God is probably not language relevant to our young people” is because adults like her have peddled an educational agenda for youth that specifically circumscribes reference to God and the Queen, references that are foundational to the country’s constitution.

This is a blatantly anti-heritage agenda, geared to tearing down the pillars on which a decent society was built. A society for which multiple tens of thousands of Australians died in two world wars to protect and perpetuate—in the name of God, king and country!

It is interesting to note that the Girl Guides of Australia are now out of step with the originally founded enterprise that spawned their movement, the Boy Scouts, which still retains in their pledge the promise “To do my duty to my God, and to the Queen of Australia.”

The Guides are also now out of step with Australia’s governor general, its head of state, who, upon taking office declares an oath to “well and truly serve Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, her heirs and successors according to law, in the office of governor general of the Commonwealth of Australia, and I will do right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of the Commonwealth of Australia, without fear or favor, affection or ill will. So help me God!”

The government of Australia is appointed by the governor general through the powers granted him (or her, to recognize the current trend) by the Crown as the Queen’s representative. During the coronation ceremony, the royal office of the Crown is recognized as being granted solely by God.

It thus would appear that the liberal feminists have divorced the Girl Guide movement in Australia not only from God and the Queen, but from recognizing the very authority by which their freedoms are granted to them under their country’s own government.

There are a pithy couple of verses in the Bible that admonish, “My son, fear thou the Lord and the king; and meddle not with them that are given to change: For their calamity shall rise suddenly; and who knows the ruin of them both?” (Proverbs 24:21-22).

These meddlers who seek to destroy the very foundations upon which their society was built will rue the day that they opened the very floodgates of liberal socialist feminist thought in their efforts to impose change under their own godless, anti-royalist agenda. For they are but preparing the way for the national collapse of any moral authority that once held their nation together in times of adversity.

How can a national spirit evolve from each member of society seeking “to be true to themselves and develop their beliefs”? For whose beliefs would one be prepared to defend one’s own country when the population, rather than educated in a basic core commitment to serve “God, king and country,” reflects a plethora of beliefs incompatible with each other, incompatible with the nation’s constitution, and hence with the very authority that gives its government the power to call the nation to battle?

The feminists have applied the wedge to the underpinnings of that which once was a worthy institution helping to craft young women of character. They will not quell their efforts with this success. They will now seek to use this precedent to penetrate other once worthy institutions with their insidious agenda for change.

Full well the prophecy rings in our ears, a prophecy for the day: “As for My people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O My people! Those who lead you cause you to err, And destroy the way of your paths” (Isaiah 3:12; New King James Version).

British Army Cut to Smallest Size Since Napoleon

British Army Cut to Smallest Size Since Napoleon

Getty Images

Britain’s future gambled on the hope of a peaceful decade

The British Army is to be cut to its smallest size since the Napoleon wars by 2020 under money-saving plans announced July 5. It will shrink from 102,000 regular soldiers to 82,000, with whole battalions being axed or merged. This will make the Army half the size it was 30 years ago when Britain fought the Falklands War.

The Army will no longer be able to conduct two large-scale operations at a time, as it did in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Former head of the Army Gen. Lord Dannatt warned on bbc Radio 4 that “the Army will be 20 percent smaller by 2012 and so by definition it will be able to do less.”

The Defense Ministry plans to make up for the shortfall by expanding the Territorial Army, bringing the total number of regulars and reserves up to 120,000. Dannatt warned that the plan to rely on reserves “is a good idea in theory,” but is “risky.”

“Predicting the future is very difficult,” he said. “Strategic shocks happen. We often don’t get it right. So let’s hope the next decade is rather more peaceful than the last decade—but I wouldn’t bet on it.”

Britain’s Defense Secretary Philip Hammond admitted that the cuts had left the Army’s morale in a “fragile” condition. “People never like change … change brings uncertainty,” he said.

These cuts come on top of the massive cuts that left Britain without any aircraft carriers and saw whole fleets of aircraft scrapped.

Dr. Daniel Goure, vice president of the Lexington Institute, a conservative think tank, warned: “Secretary Hammond’s announcement fudged the reality that in order to maintain even this small contingent of combat-capable forces, the Army was drastically cutting back on combat support capabilities such as logistics and communications in the Regular Army, pushing these functions into the reserves or relying on private contractors.”

“What remains now is a small, if shiny spearhead attached to a slight and breakable shaft,” he said.

The whole Army is now about the same size as the force guarding the Rhine in Germany during the Cold War Dr. Goure said.

“As recently as 2003, in Operation Iraqi Freedom, Great Britain deployed nearly 50,000 combatants alongside U.S. forces,” he said. “Today, it would be lucky to field half that number.”

As the saying goes, “If you wish for peace, prepare for war.” Britain is simply wishing for peace. Britain’s current budget is unsustainable, but the cuts put the whole nation at risk. It is another step toward the end of Britain’s ability to project military power beyond its borders.

Britain’s economic woes and warped spending priorities are putting the nation at risk—gambling Britain’s future that the next decade will be peaceful.

Why America Should Not Have Toppled Mubarak

Why America Should Not Have Toppled Mubarak

Chris Kleponis/AFP/Getty Images

Are children running the White House?

Apparently, President Obama has a compatriot at heart in Egypt’s new president Mohammad Morsi. Don’t like what the nation’s judges rule? Just issue an executive order and ignore the constitution. On Sunday, Morsi ordered Egypt’s Islamist-dominated parliament back in session—boldly defying the nation’s Supreme Court and the military leaders who enforced the order.

On June 14, the Supreme Court ruled that one third of the members of the lower house had been elected unlawfully—that they had been elected to seats that were reserved for secular and minority religious groups. The interim military rulers subsequently dissolved the lower house.

A few days later, Morsi was elected president. And now, one of his first moves is to annul the court’s decree and order lawmakers (most of whom are members of his party, or other ultra-conservative Islamists) back to work.

Can he legally do that? Probably not. But who can stop him?

Morsi’s move was a direct challenge to the former military rulers. It shows his strength. But more importantly, it shows the direction Morsi wants to take Egypt—away from the more secular constitution and into a fundamentalist Islamic future.

Astoundingly, America doesn’t seem concerned. Morsi’s defiance of the courts and Egypt’s constitution comes just days before a high-profile visit by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Morsi has little reason to fear. The moment America decided to embrace the “Arab Spring” and push former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak from power, it was consigned to dealing with Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood.

But it is actually worse than that. America is embracing Morsi.

In defending President Obama’s decision to invite Morsi to the White House, National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor said, “We believe that it is in the interest of the United States to engage with all parties that are committed to democratic principles, especially nonviolence.”

Sounds good, but it is a terrible lie.

If America was truly interested in supporting parties that are committed to nonviolence and the way to peace, it never would have worked to overthrow Hosni Mubarak in the first place.

Egypt’s Anwar Sadat and Hosni Mubarak administrations have done more than any other Muslim regimes to work toward real peace. Neither were perfect men, but they both risked their lives for their beliefs—and actions—that actually brought peace to a region. In fact, Anwar Sadat was assassinated by terrorists with links to Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood (and Iran) for making peace with Israel. Isn’t peacemaking the ultimate nonviolence? After Sadat’s death, Mubarak upheld the peace treaty that was the foundation for the last 30-plus years of peace.

But Egypt’s new President Mohammed Morsi embodies the total opposite of what Anwar Sadat and Hosni Mubarak stood for. And if people understood history, that would scare them.

In September, Mohammed Morsi will meet with the president of the United States. On his very first official visit, what do you think will be most important item on his agenda? This is important because it tells you a lot about an individual’s priorities. It tells you a lot about his true nature.

According to the New York Times, it will be the release of Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman from U.S. prison. Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman is the man who helped mastermind the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center in New York City.

He wants America to release a terrorist!

Better known as the “blind sheik,” Sheikh Abdel-Rahman is also the leader of the Egyptian terrorist group Al Gama’a al Islamiyya, accused of working with the Brotherhood in the assassination of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. He managed to escape Egypt unscathed after the assassination and move to Afghanistan, where he joined forces with Osama bin Laden.

Morsi is also a 9/11 “Truther” who doesn’t believe terrorists blew up the World Trade Towers, but that it was some sort of U.S. government conspiracy.

This is America’s new ally. This is the man whom America helped put in power.

What’s more, on June 14, the same day Egypt’s Supreme Court was ruling on the unlawful parliamentary election, Mohammed Morsi’s supreme spiritual guide, Mohamad Badie, was preaching that jihad against Israel was a religious obligation. Since Israel is supposedly America’s ally, one would think that President Obama might have been concerned—especially since Badie is Morsi’s supreme religious guide. Badie said Muslims are required to engage in “jihad of self and money” toward the goal of “freeing [Jerusalem] from the filth of the Zionists and imposing Muslim rule throughout beloved Palestine.”

Mohamed Morsi has lots of friends who believe this way. During the lead-up to his election, radical cleric Safwat Hegazy said at one of Morsi’s campaign rallies that “the dream of the Islamic caliphate [will] come true at the hands of Mohammed Morsi,” and “the capital of the caliphate and the United Arab States is Jerusalem.” According to Front Page Magazine, Morsi nodded his head, in agreement. At the same rally, a speaker sang a song encouraging Muslims to “brandish your weapons, say your prayers. … [B]anish the sleep from the eyes of all Jews.” The song continued: “Come on, you lovers of martyrdom, you are all Hamas. Indeed, all the lovers of martyrdom are Hamas.”

Are America’s leaders crazy? Is Congress crazy? Many republican leaders supported Egypt’s “Arab Spring” too.

Most recently, Iran’s state-controlled Fars news agency published an interview with Mohammed Morsi in which he reportedly said he would “reconsider the Camp David Accord” with Israel and that he wants closer relations with Iran. Reportedly, he also said that closer relations with Iran will create a “balance” of power in the region, “and this is part of my program.” Following international outrage, a spokesman for Morsi denied that he gave the Fars interview.

America’s actions in Egypt are utterly shameful. You don’t force out a long-time ally, a man who helped America fight the war on terror, and who was known for keeping the peace in the middle of the most volatile region in the world—and replace him with a radical Islamist bent on instituting sharia law and reestablishing an Islamic caliphate in Jerusalem, and hence sparking off World War iii—unless you have absolutely no understanding of the consequences of your actions.

America obviously didn’t learn anything from forcing the shah of Iran from power. For that piece of work, America got the bomb-seeking ayatollahs, Hezbollah, Mahmoud Amedinijad, and the world’s number one state sponsor of terrorism.

Now Egypt is well on its way to becoming another Iran—courtesy of irresponsible American foreign policy.

Meanwhile, in Syria, where toppling an enemy may make sense, America is showing restraint.

Betraying our friends, enabling our enemies: It is as if children are running the White House.