To the religious/spiritual here, a Messianic Kingdom/New Age coming?

[FriarTed]

This is for the Muslims, Jews, Christians, and other religious/spiritual people here-


will there be an earthly Messianic Rule, Millenium, New Age, whatever term you want to use? What form will it take?

My short answer- yes, either by JC's direct return with the Risen C'tians (PreMil 85%) OR by the gradual Christian discipling of the vast majority of humanity (PostMil 15%).

What say ye?

[Taran]

United Methodist Christian here.

I think probably not. People keep seeing things that look like the signs of Christ's return in glory, but in two thousand years not a one of them has been right. Thus I suspect that the kingdom of heaven is entirely personal. I'm hanging a lot on Luke 17:20-21 ("20 Being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God was coming, he answered them, 'The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed; 21 nor will they say, 'Lo, here it is!' or 'There!' for behold, the kingdom of God is in the midst of you.'" RSV), and I can't fit the Revelation into that at all.

[Alessan]

Conserative Jew here-

Maybe, someday. Not soon. I have no idea what God's plan for mankind is, but I'm positive it's nowhere near completion. We've got a long, long way to go.

And thank God for that! Why end the game just when it's starting to get interesting?

[SteveG1]

Catholic here. The short answer to the OP is "No".

[Aeschines]

Pantheist here.

We are entering/have entered the Age of Aquarius and seeing the violent overthrow (well, really the Last Great Tantrum of) Picean thought: I'm 100% right, you're 100% wrong.

Will this be Heaven on Earth? No, but the Age of Pices will probably be bloodiest, least tolerant astrological age we see in a long time. It was, however, an age of tremendous progress, with perhaps the black-and-white thinking playing a role in jump-starting modern philosophy and technology.

Let's hope the Age of Aquarius can carry us further without going too far into wishy-washiness.

But to answer the OP: great changes are coming, but the Saga of Humankind is far, far from over.

[jayjay]

Agnostic/Pantheist/VaguebeliefinaweirdForcelikething-ist here.

While I usually refer to myself as an Agnostic Apathetic, I DO kind of believe that there is some Force-like interconnectedness within the universe. I do not, however, believe that this is a conscious entity with a "plan" or an agenda as to the end of the universe. This ain't Shiva. Or Yahweh, for that matter. And I don't expect that it will ever show up on a scientific instrument, so I leave the physical side of things to science.

Which means that I expect the end of the universe to consist of the current scientific understanding of what will happen, i.e., a tossup between constant expansion/heat death and gradual recompression/new singularity/new big bang. No trumps, no angels, no Beasts, no second coming of a being who may have not even had a first one, no great giant battles between three planes of existence, no six-armed dancers, no fire giants, no giant wolves eating the earth...just a whimper or a bang.

[jayjay]

Originally Posted by jayjay

No trumps, no angels, no Beasts, no second coming of a being who may have not even had a first one, no great giant battles between three planes of existence, no six-armed dancers, no fire giants, no giant wolves eating the earth...just a whimper or a bang.

Also, just for completion, no eldritch tentacular horrors from the unimaginable depths of time and space.

[Metacom]

Episcopalian.

"No."

[jayjay]

Originally Posted by Metacom

Episcopalian.

"No."

Yeah, but Episcopalians think the end of the world is when they run out of coffee after Sunday service...

[Mehitabel]

Another Catholic. No, not really. You're supposed to live your life as IF God would judge you at any moment. But it'll be because a truck hit you, not because his Dad ends the world.

[lekatt]

Spiritualist

I see a better world by 2011, the sharp edges of religion will smooth and science will move away from defining religion as ignorance. While things won't be perfect people will begin to understand the need to work together in an atmosphere of tolerance. Much good work will be accomplished -- feeding the hungry, healing the sick -- with less emphasis on money, more emphasis on compassion.

[jayjay]

Originally Posted by lekatt

Spiritualist

I see a better world by 2011, the sharp edges of religion will smooth and science will move away from defining religion as ignorance. While things won't be perfect people will begin to understand the need to work together in an atmosphere of tolerance. Much good work will be accomplished -- feeding the hungry, healing the sick -- with less emphasis on money, more emphasis on compassion.

Strawman. Science doesn't define religion as ignorance. Science doesn't have anything to say about religion whatsoever. Religion is beyond the purview of science.

Most of the time, the complaint is that religion doesn't return the favor.

[Johanna]

Hi, I'm a Tantric Witch.
Short non-answer: How the heck would I know? (How about I read the Tarot cards on this question?)

Short smart-alecky answer: For the near term, I'd be content with just keeping the political Christian Taliban off our backs. Anything that could cause their downfall before they start another Dark Age would look like a Golden Age to me by comparison.

Just call me "Hypatia."

Longer answer: I'm curious about how so many different sources look to the year 2012 as the date when "it" will happen, whatever it is. Much of the pinpointing of 2012 is the fault of José Argüelles, whose New Age books about the Mayan calendar said its cycle comes to an end in 2012. But not all of this can be traced to Argüelles. Haven't the astrologers come up with portentious conjunctions and aspects for the year 2012? Etc. One bit of information that is not generally known: A Sufi sage I knew had given an interview in Switzerland in 1962, when he said that the change of the age should be looked for in fifty more years. This was way before the other 2012 hype began to be published. I don't know why the Sufi master gave this time frame. Perhaps it was already being talked about in esoteric circles then.

Of course, I don't know what going to happen or not going to happen, I just wondered why such widespread agreement on 2012.

[Lilairen]

Kemetic/Feri.

The idea of a "Messianic Rule" or a "New Age" or something strikes me as a claim that something about the fundamental nature of the universe is somehow magically going to change, with the best explanations for why and how being "some god waves its hands and makes it so!" or "the stars align!" or "That's how the numerology works out!"

I find this singularly implausible.

[AHunter3]

Do-it-yourself Roll-your-own eclectic here, of the Wiccan / Pantheistic sort, lots of visionary feminism stirred in.

Yeah, it's coming. Not in my lifetime or yours. But one day the species will make decisions without reference to any formal structure of power over other people; formal systems of coercion will flat-out not exist on this planet. Law enforcement will not exist. Money will not exist.

People will still squabble, get on each other's nerves, occasionally nurture petty hates, sometimes intentionally inflict pain and suffering. But it will be personal, local, between various individuals. The kind of contexts we know of now, in which many categories of picked-on & mistreated people have stored anger that gets expressed as hostility and violence towards each other and/or almost at random, and in which most people are jaded and calloused by their experience of mistreatment as to have limited empathy and concern for the pain of others, will not apply. So the petty squabbles of people will not disrupt the more pervasive sense of peaceful cooperation, and people will not fear each other and each other's freedom.

People will share what they have while welcoming each other's contributions. There will be trust and forgiveness and the assumption of being trusted and forgiven, and people will prize a reputation as one who pitches in and does good for other people.

And once we arrive there, we will persist in that condition as a species for a long long time (we are now in our infancy as a species), perhaps for hundreds of thousands of years, perhaps for millions, perhaps until the stars burn out. It is who we were meant to be, it is in our nature, it is who we are.

[AHunter3]

Oh, and in case it wasn't compellingly obvious, it happens here, in this world (not some transcendental world we get transported to as this one ends in Hollywood flames or something), and it happens to everyone (no heaven just for the saints while the sinners perish).

[Dr. Rieux]

Unitarian Universalist

No. It's just Christian mythology--and Christianity peaked a while back and is now on the decline.

[Siege]

Episcopalian, former Y2K expert, and vehement anti-rapturist.

No. Emphatically, vehemently, and loudly, NO! (Not that that will surprise the old-timers around here.)

Christian have been expecting the end of the world since Christ died and citing Scripture to back it up. They overlook verses which refer to false prophets predicting the end is near and Christ's saying that no one will know when the end comes. I remember the panic back in 1999; I've read about the panic in 999 C.E. People have pointed to any number of things and said "The world will end on [insert date]!" A few of them have gotten in deep trouble after persuading their followers to give everything away. Why should the folks who are saying the world will end in 2012, or any other date be any different?

To me, this End Times stuff is a bunch of nonsense made up a century and a half ago by a man who may well have been asmisguided as he was devout. It's a tool of fear, used to scare people into faith, not unlike a cartoon I once saw of a guy lying on the ground with a sword at this throat saying, "So, tell me about this Jesus Christ fellow?!" It also seems to me to revel too much in the suffering of one's fellow human beings. I'm afraid to me, it's Christianity at its worst and I do find it shameful.

Even if I were to decide some sort of End Times would come within my lifetime, I don't think I should I change my behaviour because of it. To me, doing so would be the equivalent of "Look busy! The boss is coming!" As a devout Christian, if I am incapable of living a good, devout life without that threat hanging over me, perhaps I'm not as good a person as I think I am. I'm not going to church today. I injured my knee quite badly two weeks ago and it won't withstand the rigors of a church service and the work week ahead. If I were to decide the end of the world is near and decide, "Whoops! I'd better go to church because of that", I'd be no more than a hypocrite and Christ had some harsh words for hypocrites.

Since I believe in a God who is truly without boundaries or limits and is far beyond human understanding, I'll concede there is a chance the world will end this week, just as there's a chance my knee will miraculously heal itself during the next few hours. Even if the world does end, it shouldn't make a difference to my daily life, conduct, and faith. God's a bit too smart to be fooled by a quick change about under duress, or so I fervently hope.

Respectfully,
CJ

[monavis]

Jesus,(who Christians belive was God), said the world would end in his generation, not in those word exactly ,but he when asked about the end of time, said,"This generation will not pass away until all things are accomplished". I believe it was in John's writings that the idea of a new world was coming. Every one has a day of death and their world ends, I do not worry about it, I know I will not live forever...no one does. Some people are conforted by the idea of Jesus returning.I will wager that in 2,000 more years people will still will be waiting.

Monavis

[AdmiralCrunch]

The world ends on July 5th, 1998. Praise "Bob"!

[Angel of the Lord]

Wiccan. No. Humanity will grow and evolve, but, for the most part, we've been doing that since the beginning of recorded history. I think that there's the possibility for a vast change in the way society works, based on the more rapid dissemation of information facilitated by electronic communication...but I have no idea if it'll actually happen, and it has nothing to do with my spirituality. And, of course, I have no idea what form it'll take.

Again, though, that's a technologically based change, not a spiritually based change, and I have no idea if the results'll be to my liking.

[tomndebb]

I have no idea whether a new age is descending on humanity, but this thread of opinions is about to descend on IMHO.

[FriarTed]

Siege- I did not say anything about the End Times- I asked about a Messianic Kingdom or New Age, with could arrive without apocalyptic disaster. So let me rephrase- do you believe there a society can or will emerge, perhaps even spread worldwide, which will embody high spiritual values?

Johanna- We didn't cause the Dark Ages- the various barbarian sieges on the Roman Empire did. The Church preserved the learning & culture of the past, and eventually tamed the barbarians. Granted, the Church held tight onto its monopolistic control of culture & learning, and adopted the power-politics of Greco-Roman civilization for its own ends.

I'm with the vast majority of modern Christian historians in decrying the murder of Hypatia. Someday tho I gotta look up the early accounts to find out what justification was given by (was it Cyril?).

And "Christian Taliban" rhetoric just sound silly. It oughtta be Godwinized.

Monavis- actually, the New World concept is first fully developed by Isaiah (60-66, I think). And some of us Christians would say that the "world" (more correctly transliterated "aion") did end in that generation with the destruction of the priest-sacrifice-Temple system in Jerusalem in 70 AD. An intriguing but still fringe teaching is growing in the Christian world that this event was the actual fulfillment of all "End-Times" prophecies, with no future Return of Christ or Resurrection or Last Judgement to occur in physical visible history, but all in the Afterlife.

tomdebb-
And why is this array of diverse & conflicting opinions on a controversial subject NOT a GD?

(which brings to mind a Monty Python skit *G*)

[tomndebb]

Well, up until the point where you began attempting to refute other posts, there had not been an actual debate. I suppose I should have just left it alone on the grounds that all religious stuff winds up back there, but it had begun to look as though it would live out its life as a poll.

::: sigh :::

I'll move it back so you can argue with people. l

[FriarTed]

just looked up Hypatia & Cyril- yep, the one contemporary C'tian writing attempting to justify it rings hollow. Apparently, it was part of a long campaign of abuses between Governor Orestes & Bishop Cyril, and was regarded as a bad thing by the Church outside Alexandria. But then, no attempt seemed to have been made to bring Cyril or his mob to justice either.

[FriarTed]

Originally Posted by tomndebb

Well, up until the point where you began attempting to refute other posts, there had not been an actual debate. I suppose I should have just left it alone on the grounds that all religious stuff winds up back there, but it had begun to look as though it would live out its life as a poll.

::: sigh :::

I'll move it back so you can argue with people. l

Thanks! *G*

[Menocchio]

Liberal Protestant.

No.

Or, more transcendentally, yes, and it could happen right now. The final battle of good against evil, and the age of peace that will follow will not happen as a clash of physical armies on Earth. It will happen in your heart, and the battle is happenning right now. The Kingdom of God is not a place, in the present or to come, but a metaphorical/spiritual state of being. Although I believe that Humanity, as a species, is improving (with some setbacks here and there) we will not all get to the Kingdom at once, nor do I think that they'll ever be a time when all of Humanity's problems are solved.

Part of the pre-millenial belief seems to be that it's always darkest before the dawn, and its's never been darker than right now, brother. I disagree. I think this isthe best time the world's ever seen, taken in balance. There's room for argument there, of course, but there's certainly been a lot worse times. What makes this time so dosh garn special that the end is nigh?

[SisterCoyote]

Originally Posted by jayjay

Yeah, but Episcopalians think the end of the world is when they run out of coffee after Sunday service...

Are you sure that's not Unitarian Universalists?

Agnostic neo-shamanic neo-pagan UU with a Trickster fixation:

No. Change is part of the landscape; it doesn't require any of the above.

[FriarTed]

I'd like to give a call out to our Jewish Dopers for their contributions!

[dropzone]

Evangelical Lutheran/agnostic/atheist, depending on the day:

Nope or "it's already happened," depending on your definitions. The Kingdom of God is in your heart.

Originally Posted by jayjay

Yeah, but Episcopalians think the end of the world is when they run out of coffee after Sunday service...

I'm converting to Moravian, whose Love Feast involves passing around sweet rolls and coffee--DURING and as PART OF the service. No more waiting until afterward!

[cmkeller]

Orthodox Jew, here.

Yes, I (and other Orthodox Jews) do believe that the Messiah will come and usher in a golden age of spiritual revival.

What form will it take? The prophecies only speak in the vaguest outlines, but the basics are: a Davidic descendant will be acknowledged by the Jewish people as their rightful king, he will somehow orchestrate the return to acknowledged Judaism of the lost tribes, and the Holy Temple in Jerusalem will be rebuilt and sacrificial service resumed. Eventually, his enlightened teachings will cause non-Jews as well to acknowledge the truth of the Torah and the futility of worship that is directed toward any entity (real or imagined) other than the G-d historically and tradiationally worshipped by the Jews.

[swampbear]

Originally Posted by jayjay

Yeah, but Episcopalians think the end of the world is when they run out of coffee after Sunday service...

You really wanna spook some Episcopalians? Run out of gin during cocktail hour.

[Bippy the Beardless]

One of the few constants of belief is the belief that we live "at the end of times" . I see no reason to think we are anymore correct about this than the Norse awaiting Ragnarok.
If this is the "end of times" it is most likely like the Hindu Kali Yuga, with the end of times going from 3120 BCE to 427000 CE or some such.

[UserID]

Nonchurch-attending, born again, science-loving Judeo-Christian here:
I'm going to die on May 17, 2025. So the world will definitely keep turning until then.

[UserID]

Originally Posted by UserID

Nonchurch-attending, born again, science-loving Judeo-Christian here:
I'm going to die on May 17, 2025. So the world will definitely keep turning until then.

I asked about a Messianic Kingdom or New Age, with could arrive without apocalyptic disaster. So let me rephrase- do you believe there a society can or will emerge, perhaps even spread worldwide, which will embody high spiritual values?

Sorry Friar, I didn't read

So here's my correction - IMO the answer is written on the heart of fallen man: No. Nothing like a New Age will occur without drastic intervention ON THE ORDER OF apocalyptic disaster. It certainly didn't when Jesus came here the first time. Man's nature hasn't changed.

[monavis]

Originally Posted by FriarTed

Siege- I did not say anything about the End Times- I asked about a Messianic Kingdom or New Age, with could arrive without apocalyptic disaster. So let me rephrase- do you believe there a society can or will emerge, perhaps even spread worldwide, which will embody high spiritual values?

Johanna- We didn't cause the Dark Ages- the various barbarian sieges on the Roman Empire did. The Church preserved the learning & culture of the past, and eventually tamed the barbarians. Granted, the Church held tight onto its monopolistic control of culture & learning, and adopted the power-politics of Greco-Roman civilization for its own ends.

I'm with the vast majority of modern Christian historians in decrying the murder of Hypatia. Someday tho I gotta look up the early accounts to find out what justification was given by (was it Cyril?).

And "Christian Taliban" rhetoric just sound silly. It oughtta be Godwinized.

Monavis- actually, the New World concept is first fully developed by Isaiah (60-66, I think). And some of us Christians would say that the "world" (more correctly transliterated "aion") did end in that generation with the destruction of the priest-sacrifice-Temple system in Jerusalem in 70 AD. An intriguing but still fringe teaching is growing in the Christian world that this event was the actual fulfillment of all "End-Times" prophecies, with no future Return of Christ or Resurrection or Last Judgement to occur in physical visible history, but all in the Afterlife.

tomdebb-
And why is this array of diverse & conflicting opinions on a controversial subject NOT a GD?

(which brings to mind a Monty Python skit *G*)

Are you saying the stars fell etc. and the moon has failed to give it's light? I guess if one wants to believe that way one can but it doesn't add up in my translation or thinking. Just as the Jew are still waiting for a Messiah.

Monavis

[Walker in Eternity]

Originally Posted by jayjay

Also, just for completion, no eldritch tentacular horrors from the unimaginable depths of time and space.

That's a shame! I always liked the Cthulhu mythos.

I am a humanist scientist, but I have agnostic leanings. Sure there is no evidence of any thing to back up theories of afterlifes etc, but that does not mean that there is nothing.

I cannot accept though that any god/creator would suddenly destroy most of his creations. I believe that if you have free will then you cannot have prophecy, all you can do is calculate the odds of an event happening.

As for the world ending in 2012, well there have been plenty of predictions for the end of the world that have been and gone and we are still here.

I like to think that we (humanity) have the potential to create a better world without the intervention of external entitites (whether divine or tentacled beasties) and that we could potentially spread out to the stars. Any potential end to our species will come either by out own mistakes or natural distasters such as meteors, super volcanoes or supernovae etc. In theory the human race could exist as long as the earth is habitable and if we develop the technology to leave here then we could exist as long as the universe is habitable. Inevitably we will die out, but not as the result of divine intervention ot the coming of a messiah to raise us all to heaven.

As an adendum to the above, another possible route to our extinction actually arises from these messianic beliefs as believers may attempt to instigate these events in effect to force gods hand.

[FriarTed]

Originally Posted by Stryfe

That's a shame! I always liked the Cthulhu mythos.

I am a humanist scientist, but I have agnostic leanings. Sure there is no evidence of any thing to back up theories of afterlifes etc, but that does not mean that there is nothing.

I cannot accept though that any god/creator would suddenly destroy most of his creations. I believe that if you have free will then you cannot have prophecy, all you can do is calculate the odds of an event happening.

As for the world ending in 2012, well there have been plenty of predictions for the end of the world that have been and gone and we are still here.

I like to think that we (humanity) have the potential to create a better world without the intervention of external entitites (whether divine or tentacled beasties) and that we could potentially spread out to the stars. Any potential end to our species will come either by out own mistakes or natural distasters such as meteors, super volcanoes or supernovae etc. In theory the human race could exist as long as the earth is habitable and if we develop the technology to leave here then we could exist as long as the universe is habitable. Inevitably we will die out, but not as the result of divine intervention ot the coming of a messiah to raise us all to heaven.

As an adendum to the above, another possible route to our extinction actually arises from these messianic beliefs as believers may attempt to instigate these events in effect to force gods hand.

I've sought in several posts to distinguish whatever Kingdom/New Age/Utopia to come from apocalyptic disaster, so let me ask you as a humanist scientist, do you believe humanity will achieve its potential & what would the world look like when that happens?

[aurelian]

Originally Posted by FriarTed

<snip> The Church preserved the learning & culture of the past, and eventually tamed the barbarians. Granted, the Church held tight onto its monopolistic control of culture & learning, and adopted the power-politics of Greco-Roman civilization for its own ends.

Sort of. The Church preserved the culture it had an interest in preserving. Did the Church preserve papyrii? (not a snarky question; I don't know.)

If you want an example of preserving and disseminating classical works, look no further than Spain. The Moors invaded in 711, bringing science, art and literature, and more or less saving the peninsula from the 'Dark Ages'. (They also kicked out the Visigoths...not much involvement from the Church there.) They established a center for translation in Toledo, thus preserving many classical texts. Though the question of convivencia is problematic and likely unresolvable, it seems fair to say that life, in most of the peninsula, in terms of religious conflict, was fairly pacific.

Eight hundred years later, the Reconquista complete, most every indigenous text found by the conquistadors, be it scientific, historical, religious or poetic, was destroyed. Fray Luis was thrown in prison for translating the Vulgate.

Also, Friar Ted (and anyone who cares to answer), though I am a crasher in this thread, I have a question (again, sincere, not snarky): Since we have always been living in the 'End Times' (according to someone, somewhere), how do you reconcile your beliefs with history? That is, to be blunt, why do you believe the present to be any different than the past?

[FriarTed]

Originally Posted by aurelian

Also, Friar Ted (and anyone who cares to answer), though I am a crasher in this thread, I have a question (again, sincere, not snarky): Since we have always been living in the 'End Times' (according to someone, somewhere), how do you reconcile your beliefs with history? That is, to be blunt, why do you believe the present to be any different than the past?

Well, the destruction of Spanish literature was done by the bad Spanish medieval-Renaissance era Catholics, unlike the good Irish Dark Ages Catholics *G*

To answer your Q- I remind you that I see two possibilities RE the Messianic Kingdom- that it will come with the direct Return of Jesus to destroy the AntiChrist powers at Armageddon OR that it has been slowly stealthily growing since Jesus judged Jerusalem in 70 AD & the Roman Empire for the next four centuries & every nation & people for the past two millenia, until eventually all nations & peoples embrace the Gospel & Standards of YHWH/Jesus.

Even if the Kingdom is to come with an Apocalyptic return of Christ, I don't necessarily see the End Times as soon. I do think there is a lot that has to be done- mainly the establishment of the Christian Church in every nation on Earth & also a much larger revival of Messianic Judaism/Judaic-C'nity.

However, I do see two signs which may indicate the End Times are approaching within perhaps this century-

the regathering of the Jews to Israel since 1948 & their 1967 retaking of Jerusalem;

the globalization of media, commerce, warfare, politics- so that global Evangelism & an international AntiChrist tyrrany & apocalyptic warfare are all possible.

[Walker in Eternity]

Originally Posted by FriarTed

I've sought in several posts to distinguish whatever Kingdom/New Age/Utopia to come from apocalyptic disaster, so let me ask you as a humanist scientist, do you believe humanity will achieve its potential & what would the world look like when that happens?

I would like to believe that humanity will survive long enough to achieve its potential, but current world events lead me to doubt that this will occur any time soon (if ever).

As to the world of the future, I'm not able to predict that, but what I'd like to see and what I think may be achievable in my lifetime would be (this is not an exhaustive list, just the ones that immediately spring to mind):

1.) A clean energy source leading to a break with fossil fuels, possibly hydrogen based, plus halting of other environmentally damaging practices.

2.) Increased democratic rule worldwide leading to true equality between all people.

3.) A stronger more dynamic UN.

Things I'd like to see, but doubt would occur in my lifetime:

1. An end to poverty/hunger/disease/dictatorships worldwide

2. Off world colonies, leading to eventual interstellar travel.

Of course just because they may be possible dose not mean any of the above are likely.

To put my statements in religious terms, I believe we have the ability to create a heaven on earth, unfortunately we also have the ability to create hell on earth, at the moment it could go either way. I hope for the best, but fear for the worst.

[Siege]

Sorry to take so long to get back to this. Even with the creation of the nation of Israel (I'll address that in the appropriate thread), I still don't think we're in any kind of New Age/Messianic Kingdom/End Times era. As far as I can tell, human nature hasn't changed much, even if technology has. There's still great good and great evil at both ends of the spectrum, with most people hanging out in the middle, trying to get by. People can be surprisingly narrow or callous at times, but then they'll turn around and show a generosity which surprises you.

I'm also in no hurry for the world to end. I'd rather like my niece's and nephew's grandchildren to hear tales of their crazy Great Aunt CJ who went off and did outlandish things like moving to Hawaii, just as I heard tales of my outlandish Great Aunt whose first husband was killed in an earthquake in India, and who then went down to South Africa where she married a man who was divorced! I like wondering which of the beliefs we cling to so ferociously and the issues we argue so passionately will sound quaint and antiquated a few hundred years from now. I'm curious about which authors, if any, will be remembered 400 years from now as Shakespeare is today. Will rap become the new Baroque or will it wind up an obscure form of music of interest to only the most devout and eccentric musicologists? Will the Beatles be seen as being as innovative as Mozart and Billy Joel as the next Haydn or will they be people no one's heard of?

I don't know. When I was growing up in the 1970's, it seemed like every other week there was a new prediction saying when the world would end and/or a new age would dawn. Maybe that left me a bit cynical. I like post-apocalyptic fiction actually. In fact, I'm reading The Stand and Robert McCammon's Swan Song is a guilty pleasure, but new ages have been predicted a great many times, including in 1000 CE and before. As it was, I spent a lot of time in 1999 convincing people life would go on as usual in 2000. Ironically, my life has changed a great deal as a result of things that happened that year.

I hope this world of ours sees 3000 CE, too, and people laugh about the funny people who were so terrified that everything would come to a screeching halt in 2000 CE. It's a glorious, warm, summer evening; I'm in love; I have a good job; and my niece and nephew and the rest of their family are visiting and life is good. Why on earth (pun intended) would I want this to pass away?

CJ

[monavis]

Originally Posted by Siege

Sorry to take so long to get back to this. Even with the creation of the nation of Israel (I'll address that in the appropriate thread), I still don't think we're in any kind of New Age/Messianic Kingdom/End Times era. As far as I can tell, human nature hasn't changed much, even if technology has. There's still great good and great evil at both ends of the spectrum, with most people hanging out in the middle, trying to get by. People can be surprisingly narrow or callous at times, but then they'll turn around and show a generosity which surprises you.

I'm also in no hurry for the world to end. I'd rather like my niece's and nephew's grandchildren to hear tales of their crazy Great Aunt CJ who went off and did outlandish things like moving to Hawaii, just as I heard tales of my outlandish Great Aunt whose first husband was killed in an earthquake in India, and who then went down to South Africa where she married a man who was divorced! I like wondering which of the beliefs we cling to so ferociously and the issues we argue so passionately will sound quaint and antiquated a few hundred years from now. I'm curious about which authors, if any, will be remembered 400 years from now as Shakespeare is today. Will rap become the new Baroque or will it wind up an obscure form of music of interest to only the most devout and eccentric musicologists? Will the Beatles be seen as being as innovative as Mozart and Billy Joel as the next Haydn or will they be people no one's heard of?

I don't know. When I was growing up in the 1970's, it seemed like every other week there was a new prediction saying when the world would end and/or a new age would dawn. Maybe that left me a bit cynical. I like post-apocalyptic fiction actually. In fact, I'm reading The Stand and Robert McCammon's Swan Song is a guilty pleasure, but new ages have been predicted a great many times, including in 1000 CE and before. As it was, I spent a lot of time in 1999 convincing people life would go on as usual in 2000. Ironically, my life has changed a great deal as a result of things that happened that year.

I hope this world of ours sees 3000 CE, too, and people laugh about the funny people who were so terrified that everything would come to a screeching halt in 2000 CE. It's a glorious, warm, summer evening; I'm in love; I have a good job; and my niece and nephew and the rest of their family are visiting and life is good. Why on earth (pun intended) would I want this to pass away?

CJ

I am with you Seige; I think unhappy or depressed people want the world to end, as it would be easier than solving their problems themselves. I find it sad that so many people live just for the purpose of dying and being happy in another life!

To me I was born to live; as well, and as long as I can. I have a saying I like: He with the most years wins!!!

Monavis

[SentientMeat]

If I may be termed spiritual in that I enjoy, and take great notice of, the output of my amygdala and limbic system, I say "no" (<0.0001%) with the caveat that I really really hope that such weird shit happens and thus convinces me that we're Doomed.

[The Flying Dutchman]

Originally Posted by monavis

Jesus,(who Christians belive was God), said the world would end in his generation, not in those word exactly ,but he when asked about the end of time, said,"This generation will not pass away until all things are accomplished". I believe it was in John's writings that the idea of a new world was coming. Every one has a day of death and their world ends, I do not worry about it, I know I will not live forever...no one does. Some people are conforted by the idea of Jesus returning.I will wager that in 2,000 more years people will still will be waiting.

Monavis

I took those words of Jesus to mean primarily that His death and resurection would set the future in motion. Secondarily , as I lean towards preterism, it could very well refer to His second coming around the time of the destruction of Jerusalem.

I speculate that we've been in the "end times" for almost 2000 years. Most every Christian believes that the "end times" are distinct events that involve everyone at the same time. If we Christians accept that the 6 day creation took 14 billion years, we can also assume that the end times can take place over several millenia or even longer.

[Siege]

Originally Posted by monavis

I am with you Seige; I think unhappy or depressed people want the world to end, as it would be easier than solving their problems themselves. I find it sad that so many people live just for the purpose of dying and being happy in another life!

Actually, I've suffered from clinical depression most of my life and have been suicidal a time or two. It's just that, even when things were at their worst and I didn't want to go on, I couldn't see taking the world with me. I knew there was beauty in it, even if I was cut off from it. Technically, according to some interpretations of my beliefs, heaven awaits me. I'd still prefer to take my time getting there, though, and surely part of heaven will be seeing the future unfold and being able to appreciate it on a grand scale in ways I can't dream of now.

CJ

[SolGrundy]

Originally Posted by jayjay

Strawman. Science doesn't define religion as ignorance. Science doesn't have anything to say about religion whatsoever. Religion is beyond the purview of science.

Sociology, anthropology, and theology are sciences. Sociologists and anthropologists frequently speak of religion in terms of its being an attempt to explain the unknown, or in other words, aspects of our existence about which we are ignorant. This is frequently used to justify value judgements or true/false statements about religion -- it's only a societal control mechanism or driven by fear of the unknown, etc., and there's no "real" truth to it.

Originally Posted by jayjay

Most of the time, the complaint is that religion doesn't return the favor.

So religion is beyond the purview of science, but science apparently isn't beyond the purview of "well, they did it first! And more often!!!"

[SolGrundy]

And just to take part in the poll:

Protestant Christian, and I believe "no." We've had at least 2000 years (longer, if you believe as I do that other religions are differing voices of the same God) to figure this stuff out. Not only have we done a lousy job of figuring it out, but we've corrupted the message into one of hate, judgement, arrogance, deception, selfishness, and vice.

At this point, I'm more inclined to believe in the philosophy of The Onion, that the next coming will take the form of a memo from God, reading: "What part of 'love thy neighbor' don't you understand? Seriously, people. What the fuck?"

[Qadgop the Mercotan]

Originally Posted by SolGrundy

Sociology, anthropology, and theology are sciences.

No they're not. They're areas of study. Or more rigorously, they're areas of discipline which require study and method. Within them, scientific method may be employed on occasion. Or not.

[SolGrundy]

Originally Posted by Qadgop the Mercotan

No they're not. They're areas of study. Or more rigorously, they're areas of discipline which require study and method. Within them, scientific method may be employed on occasion. Or not.

What's the significance and relevance of making that correction, that sociology and social anthropology should not be referred to as "sciences?" If it's that my use of the term is inaccurate, because not all studies require a provable hypothesis, then point taken. But if it's to suggest that the lack of provable hypotheses leaves the study open to value judgements from which the physical sciences are free, then I'd take exception to that.

The point remains that the statement "It would be nice if people would stop trying to use science to disprove religion but instead learn to use both in cooperation" can hardly be called a "Strawman."