Thanks for the article, it was an interesting read. He has some points and lots of facts on astronomy. The thing that caught me though is that he while he doesn't think it is likely, he can't disprove it. If anything he helps the cause in the conclusion when he says the odds are extremely long that it all fits. He puts it off as a very unlikely coincedence. That doesn't really sell me, if anything it makes me more curious. I'm not saying that I'm selling all my stuff and shouting for the end, but it is interesting. I'm not arrogant enough to guarantee nothing will happen. The more I learn about Astronomy, the more fortunate I feel that we humans have lasted this long. Heck, just life in general on this planet.
Well maybe we can't destroy the Earth yet with nuclear weapons but if we keep advancing in technology at the rate we currently are then it's very possible we could in the next 100 years. Think about 1800s horses and buggy's, 1910s airplanes and cars, 1920s automatic rifles, bombs, military airplanes, 1940s development of nuclear weapons, 1960s computers, 2000s everything in the past 20x better including nuclear weapons, and hell I could keep going on and on.
And I feel fine... BTW- as to the concept of the "rapture" "Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye here gazing into the heavens? This same Jesus shall return in like manner..." -paraphrase from Acts 1. "we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord." -parphrase from 1 Thessalonians 4 "rapture" simply means "catching away" or "to be caught up" Semantics... and a concept most traditional Christians have believed in since the first century church... if not, when then did the Epistles get written? BTW- Mankind absolutely knows everything.
You can't disprove the earth will be destroyed today by a meteor we didn't catch....but that doesn't dominate our thoughts. But if I said today that a meteor was going to hit the earth and destroy us all, that would be more definitive than what the Mayans "said" by having this cycle of their calendar end at some point uncertain. We have no idea what they intended or thought about it, even if what they thought about it mattered.
What? You really believe that Mankind knows everything? I mean honestly? Because to me, it seems like we are discovering new things every single day..... Things about the creation of the universe, the human g-nome, the deep sea, life..... Maybe I am missing your point, what did you mean by "mankind knows everything"? DD
I wish I could let this go, but I can't. This issue is mega-important to me, and I'm not a dogma guy at all. This one I think goes to the very core of what we are to be about as the Church...and where I believe we've gotten sooo off the mark. John Nelson Darby created the concept of the Rapture in the 1830's. Not at all a concept believed by the early church or first century jews. He brought the idea over to America. I would argue that has been tragic for the church in the way it interprets salvation transforming the gospel to nothing more than fire insurance...a get out of jail free card from hell. It's born out of dualism and gnosticism that the early church was STRONGLY against. I'd also point out that this is the danger of reading the Bible soooo literally without any dive into context...particularly the political context that the Church was juxtaposing itself against at the time the epistles and gospels were written. They are drenched in setting up Jesus as the true Caesar....greater than Rome's Caesar. Which he was and is. Below is an excerpt from N.T. Wright...but I'd suggest picking one of his books, "Surprised by Hope", if you're interested. http://www.ntwrightpage.com/Wright_BR_Farewell_Rapture.htm Farewell to the Rapture (N.T. Wright, Bible Review, August 2001. Reproduced by permission of the author) Little did Paul know how his colorful metaphors for Jesus’ second coming would be misunderstood two millennia later. The American obsession with the second coming of Jesus — especially with distorted interpretations of it — continues unabated. Seen from my side of the Atlantic, the phenomenal success of the Left Behind books appears puzzling, even bizarre[1]. Few in the U.K. hold the belief on which the popular series of novels is based: that there will be a literal “rapture” in which believers will be snatched up to heaven, leaving empty cars crashing on freeways and kids coming home from school only to find that their parents have been taken to be with Jesus while they have been “left behind.” This pseudo-theological version of Home Alone has reportedly frightened many children into some kind of (distorted) faith. This dramatic end-time scenario is based (wrongly, as we shall see) on Paul’s First Letter to the Thessalonians, where he writes: “For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a shout of command, with the voice of an archangel and the trumpet of God. The dead in Christ will rise first; then we, who are left alive, will be snatched up with them on clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord” (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17). What on earth (or in heaven) did Paul mean? It is Paul who should be credited with creating this scenario. Jesus himself, as I have argued in various books, never predicted such an event[2]. The gospel passages about “the Son of Man coming on the clouds” (Mark 13:26, 14:62, for example) are about Jesus’ vindication, his “coming” to heaven from earth. The parables about a returning king or master (for example, Luke 19:11-27) were originally about God returning to Jerusalem, not about Jesus returning to earth. This, Jesus seemed to believe, was an event within space-time history, not one that would end it forever. The Ascension of Jesus and the Second Coming are nevertheless vital Christian doctrines[3], and I don’t deny that I believe some future event will result in the personal presence of Jesus within God’s new creation. This is taught throughout the New Testament outside the Gospels. But this event won’t in any way resemble the Left Behind account. Understanding what will happen requires a far more sophisticated cosmology than the one in which “heaven” is somewhere up there in our universe, rather than in a different dimension, a different space-time, altogether. The New Testament, building on ancient biblical prophecy, envisages that the creator God will remake heaven and earth entirely, affirming the goodness of the old Creation but overcoming its mortality and corruptibility (e.g., Romans 8:18-27; Revelation 21:1; Isaiah 65:17, 66:22). When that happens, Jesus will appear within the resulting new world (e.g., Colossians 3:4; 1 John 3:2). Paul’s description of Jesus’ reappearance in 1 Thessalonians 4 is a brightly colored version of what he says in two other passages, 1 Corinthians 15:51-54 and Philippians 3:20-21: At Jesus’ “coming” or “appearing,” those who are still alive will be “changed” or “transformed” so that their mortal bodies will become incorruptible, deathless. This is all that Paul intends to say in Thessalonians, but here he borrows imagery—from biblical and political sources—to enhance his message. Little did he know how his rich metaphors would be misunderstood two millennia later. First, Paul echoes the story of Moses coming down the mountain with the Torah. The trumpet sounds, a loud voice is heard, and after a long wait Moses comes to see what’s been going on in his absence. Second, he echoes Daniel 7, in which “the people of the saints of the Most High” (that is, the “one like a son of man”) are vindicated over their pagan enemy by being raised up to sit with God in glory. This metaphor, applied to Jesus in the Gospels, is now applied to Christians who are suffering persecution. Third, Paul conjures up images of an emperor visiting a colony or province. The citizens go out to meet him in open country and then escort him into the city. Paul’s image of the people “meeting the Lord in the air” should be read with the assumption that the people will immediately turn around and lead the Lord back to the newly remade world. Paul’s mixed metaphors of trumpets blowing and the living being snatched into heaven to meet the Lord are not to be understood as literal truth, as the Left Behind series suggests, but as a vivid and biblically allusive description of the great transformation of the present world of which he speaks elsewhere. Paul’s misunderstood metaphors present a challenge for us: How can we reuse biblical imagery, including Paul’s, so as to clarify the truth, not distort it? And how can we do so, as he did, in such a way as to subvert the political imagery of the dominant and dehumanizing empires of our world? We might begin by asking, What view of the world is sustained, even legitimized, by the Left Behind ideology? How might it be confronted and subverted by genuinely biblical thinking? For a start, is not the Left Behind mentality in thrall to a dualistic view of reality that allows people to pollute God’s world on the grounds that it’s all going to be destroyed soon? Wouldn’t this be overturned if we recaptured Paul’s wholistic vision of God’s whole creation?
IROC it and MadMax, I know you both. considering the many views within Christianity on the rapture issue both AG doctrine, Darby's influence with the Plymouth Brethern on Scofield, what I interpret as Wright's combinations of portions of Dominion theory and Preterism; in context of scripture and the Ante-Nicene, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers writings... there is quite a lot of ground to cover concerning Christ's 2nd coming. Escatology in belief and doctrine is very broad. It takes into account dispensationalism, millenialism, literalism and many other ism-s that require quite alot of thorough research and study. Not to try to box in Darby, AG, or Wright... I think the subject still would be worthy of more investigation both through the scriptures and the research others have done prior to settling with great certainty in any one camp. The historical context of scripture is needed, the writings of the early Fathers good (I've read most of them, that's a tall order to study- exhaustive) understanding the development and history of escatology, reviewing the reformational issues and considering carefully the whole counsel of scripture is really a challenge in this area. I, for example am not a dispensational teacher as it is define doctrinally by most churches/denominations. Yet, many times that is a red flag to those who are. Getting the Christ in me, conformed to His image has been a far greater challenge for me. I think the 2nd coming and end of the world issues are very important and I have made them a personal focus for 29 years, but I don't know how far I have come on it. It is quite challenging for me.
Interesting debate on the rapture..... But I noticed that neither Max nor you Rhester has voted in the poll. Do you guys think the end of the world is near? DD
I read and don't dismiss apocalyptic stories outright (magnetic pole switching, Gulf stream dying, catastrophic environmental failures, 70 trillion dollar debt, food and clean water shortages), and I don't think the world will end. The way we live and believe will change for better or worse, but extinction is different. Humans are resilient. We live in Siberia and the Sahara. Could civilization end in the next 20? Sure...but people felt the same way in the 70s.
i've read a ton about this...not just the n.t. wright stuff. and i'm pretty firmly in one camp on it, however dangerous that may be. you know i'm hardly what one would call dogmatic within Christian circles...but i think this rapture stuff is way far off when i consider the context of the things the early church was most concerned with...and when i consider the hebrew and political contexts of the shreds of scripture that are used to support it only through a literal reading. i honestly believe it's dangerous stuff that causes and has caused the Church to take its eye off the ball....and become a broker of fire insurance, only, in terms of its place in theology. but as you know...i could be wrong!! i am a lot...just ask my wife!!
Wouldn't that fall under the "No" category? Because if you believed it was near, then it would be a yes...but being that you don't know....extrapolates to "No belief" that it is going to end. DD
i don't think so....i'm an agnostic on the issue, not an atheist! not bold enough to pretend i know one way or the other.
I believe the Left Behind stuff is wrong. I don't know of a rapture (as defined by the "left behind" doctrines) being anywhere in the bible. But take the issue of final judgment, that is weaved into the discussion and Jesus emphasis of being prepared, the thief illustrations, the direct statements and the context of them by the Apostle Peter when he stated, "remember scoffers will come saying "where is this promise that Jesus is coming again (NLT)" careful consideration of the rest of his remarks in the third chapter of his 2nd epistle is warranted. Probably on a belief basis I would align very much with you all the way to the I could be wrong, for me very wrong! My post had to do thinking how much there is out there on the subject and how easy it would be to divide over it. I personally think the pre-trib "left behind" rapture stuff is very dangerous. Most often I get alot of reaction on that from other Pastors. But, whatever camp you are firmly in I am sure I would feel also welcome and comfortable there. Now- don't forget lunch sometime.
So, in a thread about do you think the end is near....both of you are in here arguing...the "I don't know" stance. Are you sure that you guys are not in politics? DD
How would I presume to know that, Da Da? From my faith perspective...Jesus said he will come back unexpectedly...like a thief in the night. From a purely scientific perspective...there are all sorts of things floating around space that could make for a very nasty day for earth's inhabitants. Mankind by itself possesses enough weaponry to destroy itself. I have a belief about how the story ends...I just don't know what it will look like or what the events leading up to it will look like.
Oh, I'm definitely in the Goode Co for lunch camp soon!!! I hear ya...I don't want to divide...but I think discernment on this issue is really important for the Church....to the point of getting down to the very purpose of the Church and to our role with creation. I think this is why early church fathers were so freaked about by the dualism (heaven -good; creation - bad) and gnosticism that was floating around...because it was a product of Hellenistic religion/philosophy and not a product of Yahweh. What's amazing is how quickly this idea swept through the church...relatively speaking. Back in the 70's and 80's (before the Hal Lindsays were accepted) if you brought up the idea of some pre-tribulation rapture people in the church would look at you funny...they'd ask, "what about God's redeeming of creation? what of our physical resurrection?? how do you get the notion that creation is bad and the spirit is good - taoism??" Now it's just widely accepted. The Left Behind books helped. The intrigue of the potential story, perhaps. But I don't find a bit of it to be theologically sound...to be scripturally sound.
