Superman & The "Left Behind" series: Do people actually believe in this or is it just entertainment?

[Thudlow_Boink]

@Strassia

That there will be an end of the world and a Judgment Day is pretty widely accepted. What is unique to the various Dispensationalists is the idea of the seven years of tribulations and rapture of the true believers (before or after the seven years depending). That is based on some convoluted reading of Daniel and Revelations. The Left Behind series is co-written by a Fundamentalist preacher who believes in the pre-Tribulation Rapture. He has said that the books are more than fiction, they are supposed to lay out the exact sequence of events that will happen any time now and prove that he was right all along.

This bears repeating. Thanks to Left Behind, many people, both Christians and non-christians, who hadn’t previously thought much or heard much or studied much about Christian eschatology, have gotten the impression that the version of the End Times depicted in Left Behind is the commonly accepted, Biblically mandated Christian belief about the end of the world. And this, if I understand correctly, was one of Tim LaHaye’s goals in writing the books. In the interest of fighting ignorance it’s good to point out that this is only one, relatively recent, Christian perspective.

[BrightNShiny]

Via Slacktivist, here is Carl Olson’s critique of Left Behind’s theology (from National Review):

First, the “left-behind” theology is not the “Christian” or the “biblical” view of the end times, despite what LaHaye says, or what the media sometimes echoes. Premillennial dispensationalism and the belief in a Rapture event separate from the Second Coming is rejected, either explicitly or implicitly, by the Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox churches, and nearly every major Protestant denomination. Dispensationalism, with its particular views about the nature of the Church and the role of Jews in end-times events, was created in the 1830s by former Anglican priest John Nelson Darby (1800-1882) and later systematized in the United States by C. I. Scofield (1843-1921) and Lewis Sperry Chafer (1871-1952). Hal Lindsey’s 1970 best-selling The Late Great Planet Earth took popular dispensationalism into secular culture, a feat repeated by the “Left Behind” series.

As Evangelical scholar and Wheaton College graduate Ronald M. Henzel has decisively shown in his book, Darby, Dualism, and the Decline of Dispensationalism, Darby built his entire theology on a radical dualism between heaven and earth that was unprecedented in the history of orthodox Christian thought. As Henzel notes, no dispensationalist has ever “been able to offer a single point of continuity between Dispensationalism and any other school of theology.”

Offered without comment. I’m not a Christian, and I don’t have enough specific knowledge to enter this debate.

[ITR_champion]

@Sage_Rat

“People are magically transported to heaven and the remaining suckers are going to get it, from Satan” Is pretty apt a description of the Catholic interpretation, as I understand it. The Rapture mythology has its particularly intricacies, but I believe that this description is a fairly good overview of general Christian thought, not just the Fundamentalist. Here is, for example, a quote from the Wikipedia page on the Apocalypse:

Your automatic acceptance of whatever you find on Wikipedia has once again lead you into error. If we instead consult a reliable source written by somebody who knows what they’re talking about, we quickly find that the Catholic position on these issues is not what you claim it is. Honestly, how often is this going to have to happen before you accept the fact that Wikipedia is garbage?

@sassyfras

Question: Do people watch this and read this, in the sense that people watched Superman II, appreciating the lessons to humanity but not actually expecting the man of steel to rescue them in real life, or is this Left Behind series taken seriously? Do millions of people actually believe this series, as in they expect this to happen within their lifetime? Or in any human lifetime?

Back near the start of the decade I kept my own little Rapture Index going by observing what proportion of the four Baptist churches between my home and school were mentioning the Rapture on their signboards on any given day. My Rapture Index peaked at 75% in 2002. Enthusiasts, however, will be disappointed to know that it sank to 0% in 2003 and has remained there ever since.

In other words, belief in the Rapture is a fad that comes and goes kind of like cargo pants. And it’s quite dumb to believe in it, though not necessarily any dumber than secular apocalypses like the Y2K bug.

[No_Wikipedia_Cites]

@ITR_champion

Honestly, how often is this going to have to happen before you accept the fact that Wikipedia is garbage?.

If it makes you feel better, I accept that particular fact wholeheartedly. I think we all do, deep down inside.

[Der_Trihs]

@jayjay

Well, there is one: Kneel before Zod!

Zod, God; there’s only one letter different.

[DanBlather]

@Bridget_Burke

You know, one of those women who tours the country to lecture other women about Their Place in the Home.

Very similar to the women who both themselves and their daughter were pregnant before marriage tour the country to urge abstinence.

[DanBlather]

@ITR_champion

And it’s quite dumb to believe in it, though not necessarily any dumber than secular apocalypses like the Y2K bug.

As a devout atheist I would agree with that. The 2012 and Y2K folks drive me nuts.

[begbert2]

@DanBlather

As a devout atheist I would agree with that. The 2012 and Y2K folks drive me nuts.

Well, there was a legitimate reason to be at least mildy concerned - if Y2K had caught us unawares, then it would surely have punked a lot of people with some sort of negative results. Of course, we weren’t unaware, and any problems deemed important were naturally dealt with early and often.

It’s sort of like, it’s not irratinal to be a bit worried about a stovetop fire. It is irrational to be concerned about one after you’ve gone and bought smoke alarms and kitchen fire extinguishers. And buying that asbestos suit is just nuts.

ETA: I’m mildly concerned about the unix rollover date, though I forget when that will be. Regardless I figure other people will handle it (though if I was maintaining a unix app, I’d certainly take a glance at it.)

[Skald_the_Rhymer]

@Der_Trihs

Zod, God; there’s only one letter different.

No, no, no! :mad:

You’re supposed to make some over-the-top claim that Movie Zod is significantly less sadistic than Old Testament Yahweh. Then I respond that you’re being overly broad. But since you didn’t do your part, now I have to point out that MZ could’ve killed a lot of people he didn’t, while OTY was clearly off his meds, and there’s no one to counter!

[Cheshire_Human]

@Sage_Rat

The Apocalypse is fairly well accepted Christian doctrine.* What actually happens at that point may be a topic of debate, but that it will happen, and that it could happen at any point in time is what pretty much every Christian should believe. The Fundamentalists just happen to be the only ones who actually talk about it.

• Yes yes, there’s some Christian group who disagrees with any particular thing in the Bible. Get over it.

No, actually it is a doctrine accepted by only a small minority of Christian sects. Catholic, Orthodox and Anglican together make up a majority of Christians world-wide (US may be different). None of them believe in that doctrine. Add in the numerous Protestant sects that also reject it, and you are left with 25% or less (US only Christians probably more).

[jayjay]

@Skald_the_Rhymer

No, no, no! :mad:

You’re supposed to make some over-the-top claim that Movie Zod is significantly less sadistic than Old Testament Yahweh. Then I respond that you’re being overly broad. But since you didn’t do your part, now I have to point out that MZ could’ve killed a lot of people he didn’t, while OTY was clearly off his meds, and there’s no one to counter!

Yes, but OTY never became a transsexual drag queen on a bus in the Australian desert, so there’s that…

[Cheshire_Human]

@Sage_Rat

“People are magically transported to heaven and the remaining suckers are going to get it, from Satan” Is pretty apt a description of the Catholic interpretation, as I understand it…

Then you misunderstand it. It’s an apt description, only in the sense that “The American Revolution was all about taxes” is an apt description of American History.

[DanBlather]

@Cheshire_Human

No, actually it is a doctrine accepted by only a small minority of Christian sects. Catholic, Orthodox and Anglican together make up a majority of Christians world-wide (US may be different). None of them believe in that doctrine. Add in the numerous Protestant sects that also reject it, and you are left with 25% or less (US only Christians probably more).

Why include Anglicans? They are just about 3% of the Christians worldwide.

[Cheshire_Human]

@DanBlather

Why include Anglicans? They are just about 3% of the Christians worldwide.

OK, how about the “Anglican Communion” which is what I meant. It’s a bunch of different sects (including American Episcopalians) that have all banded together, and consider the Archbishop of Canterbury to be their leader, but with considerably less authority than the Catholic Pope. Collectively, they form a significantly larger percentage. Besides, they (like the several Orthodox sects) are an offshoot of Catholicism, share a very large body of doctrine, and most importantly are needed for me to get a majority by adding up “the big three”.
But seriously, though, most theologians consider those three to belong together, separate from Protestantism, and together they form a majority of all Christians, world-wide.

[BrainGlutton]

@Cheshire_Human

OK, how about the “Anglican Communion” which is what I meant. It’s a bunch of different sects (including American Episcopalians) that have all banded together, and consider the Archbishop of Canterbury to be their leader, but with considerably less authority than the Catholic Pope. Collectively, they form a significantly larger percentage. Besides, they (like the several Orthodox sects) are an offshoot of Catholicism, share a very large body of doctrine, and most importantly are needed for me to get a majority by adding up “the big three”.
But seriously, though, most theologians consider those three to belong together, separate from Protestantism, and together they form a majority of all Christians, world-wide.

No, no, no! There are Catholics, you see, and Orthodox, and Anglicans, and Mormons, and Jews and Muslims and Hindus; and then there are Christians. (All the other names just refer to variants of Satanism anyway.)

[Sage_Rat]

@JRDelirious

That’s gonna be news to most Catholics I know; it sure does not sound like anything I heard through years of C-school. And to many classic Protestants who as far as I knew shared the POV that the whole phenom of living and dead rising, believers being swept up into the clouds to meet Jesus, and a final Cosmic ass-whupping, is what happens after everybody in the world goes through the period of tribulations, whatever form they take (of course, most major branches of Christianity for centuries were – and many are – happy to accept that Revelation was an allegorical prophesy and that it meant nasty things would happen, but not necessarily literally as it says, and if you kept the faith you’d make it OK)

Yes, because if it happens after tribulations rather than before that makes it an entirely different thing…

[Sage_Rat]

@Cheshire_Human

Then you misunderstand it. It’s an apt description, only in the sense that “The American Revolution was all about taxes” is an apt description of American History.

For a one sentence description, it sounds fair enough. The American Revolution was a war that was fought over taxation. You might add other details, but that really doesn’t change anything. If you think it’s absurd for people to fight a war over taxes, regardless of what all other details about the Revolution you might add, it’s still a war over taxes. It continues to be “absurd”.

[begbert2]

@Sage_Rat

Yes, because if it happens after tribulations rather than before that makes it an entirely different thing…

That’s the whole focus of the idea of rapture, so yeah - it’s entirely different. If the faithful have to stick around and take their lumps with the rest of us sinners, then there is no rapture.

[Sage_Rat]

@begbert2

That’s the whole focus of the idea of rapture, so yeah - it’s entirely different. If the faithful have to stick around and take their lumps with the rest of us sinners, then there is no rapture.

But again, I suspect that the point of the OP is about absurdity not chronology. One is not more or less absurd than the other.

[begbert2]

@Sage_Rat

But again, I suspect that the point of the OP is about absurdity not chronology. One is not more or less absurd than the other.

Hmm, you may have a point - if I was ranking end-of-days scenarios, that would be a relatively minor detail; after all, if a diety is willing to torture sinners forever in hell, why wouldn’t he warm them up a little with a pre-game show first?

Of course, this also depends on how much other stuff is being assumed and taken literally; there’s a lot of stuff in revelations that is rather specific and specifically nuts, so if anyone is trying to take it all literally it signficantly overshadows anybody who is very simple and vague about it - “Jesus is going to come again and then there’ll be the final judgement”, for example. (Most of the mormons I know rarely-if-ever get more specific than that, just to establish I’m not inventing the level of vagueness here.)