Huh! How do you like that. Somehow I deleted the comment Rantz left on my comment page.
Rantz - I’m sorry. I’ll do my best to pick this up from memory.
So, Armegeddon. If I remember correctly the student had some panic over June 6, 2006, and it’s numerical “significance.” In fact, that seemed to be what sent the student searching for answers.
Well, clearly the world didn’t end, (Or perhaps it did while I was sleeping and I’m now a part of the Matrix.) so I’m not sure where to go with this. How about a cursory overview of Christian eschatology - that is the end of the world - as I, a layperson, understand it?
Everything hinges on the return of Jesus. This is the one thing that ties all the positions together, though there is a fair amount of disagreement in the details.
OK, on the one end of the stick you’ve got the fundamentalists. They take a very, well, literal view of the symbolism found is apocalyptic books like Revelation. They are keen to assign specific people, places and dates to those texts. Think of the Left Behind series, and you have the general idea. Some wind up looking foolish, as one “end of the world” after another passes without event. You could also call them escapists, because most think Christians are getting sucked up into heaven at some point during the course of events.
On the other end you’ve got the humanists. They strip most - if not all - of the supernatural from these same Biblical texts. (At the extreme they will deny the physical resurrection of Jesus.) As a result, the “end of the world” as they see it comes when humanity finally learns to get along. For the humanists, Jesus’ return is strictly metaphorical.
I would not put myself in either of those camps. In fact, this is a place when I’m a bit unsettled in my personal belief. But I’m OK with that. I’ve got enough to busy myself with for now - stuff like grace. However and whenever it all works out, well… it’s not like I get to re-write the script.
