There has been lots of talk in the last year for the year 2012. We had several cults already predict the end and people killing their children and being milked out of all their money by some snake-oil salesman in the guise of a servant of Christ. There are several organizations, SDA, JW, FA, Charasmatics, etc. who are presently preaching that we are in the last days (as they have been for 100 years but now more than ever). The end, they say, will result in the world being cleansed with fire, just as the world was once cleansed by water. They take it to be a literal end of our earth and of our heavens or some other hell on earth scenario as God begins to create His New Creation. I tell you the truth, Christians (even Christian unviersalists) who believe this, is greatly decieved.
Genesis 8:21-22
When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor [a scent of satisfaction to His heart], the Lord said to Himself, I will never again curse the ground because of man, for the imagination (the strong desire) of manâs heart is evil and wicked from his youth; neither will I ever again smite and destroy every living thing, as I have done. While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.
Humanity will live beyond religion of Christianity and the reason why is it is the truth. Since I affirm belief in Christ, and believe that God is real and true to His Word, then the only answer to everyoneâs end time dilemma is universalism and that the fire is not literally a physical force destroying any living being or even the earth, since God promised both the earth will never again be cursed, nor will God destroy any living thing because of what man has done and because of this, the Earth will remain, it will never cease and humanity will flourish and unify with the advent of a new age which many cannot comprehend and because of technology, it is the end of everything as we know it for humanity.
Genesis 11:6
And the Lord said, Behold, they are one people and they have all one language; and this is only the beginning of what they will do, and now nothing they have imagined they can do will be impossible for them.
Yes sir. I donât know if we can look at what we will be as the same as current humanity though. Truly being one (joined to the Head of Christ) is something that eye has not seen nor ear heard. It is beyond what we can imagine.
As to 2012, it may signal the end of the age (or not, I donât put much stock in it, but see no reason why other cultures wouldnât have some understanding of the ages), and the unveiling of the Sons of God, but there is no literal destruction coming.
As a former JW, they believe that the planet is not going to be destroyed, only the wicked things on it and hence the new earth.
What is Peter referring to in 2 Pet 3:6,7? Heâs comparing a coming destruction of the earth on a par with the destruction of the flood, and so he seems to contradict what God says in Genesis 8?
Notice that at the end here it says, âDuring all the days of the earth . . .â To me, this is not a promise that the days of the earth will be unending, but that during all the days of the earth, these things will continue without the interruption of a similar catastrophe.
Also, that God will not destroy every living thing. But following, it seems that (at least symbolically), He does destroy the present heaven and earth and, fairly immediately, replace them:
We will always be creatures of this universe â at least into the biblically foreseeable future â He made us for the earth, to rule and reign here and manifest forth His glory and make Him visible in the material world.
I do happen to believe that the world will shortly (say within about 20yrs) enter the great tribulation. If that makes me one of the deceived then thereâs little I can do other than to watch, pray and consider carefully any other interpretations of scripture.
Indeed it appears this way and there is actually talk that 2 Peter was never written by Peter anyways. I would go further into what 2 Peter and Jude were referring to but I donât have time today.
I hear you, and I believe the reason you think this way is because you came from Christianity before understanding of UR. If you were never taught the world was going to end, the way it was ending, you would have never had the idea it would be ending.
I was at a JW convention and the speaker said we are not in the last day, but in the very hour of the End.
I was at a Charasmatic Faith meeting and the speaker said the very same thing.
My SDA friends keep telling me that the end is coming as well.
The one thing is certain, and it has proved itself over and over again. What mankind believes is the end that is to come, has never happened even in though they say it was in the very hour. There are tons of historical evidence that shows such thinking of the âendâ has been predicted and failed over and over and over again. The constant is not that the end is coming, but rather what kind of end they were taught was coming and they saw it through the eyes of fear, and fear for those who donât believe as they do going to go through the worse of it. That is the thinking of those who believe in a conditional salvation, a doctrine which proves such end.
We do not believe in such doctrine or belief, why would we believe in the same conclusion.
Absolutely AUniversalist. The end is coming, but only of the bondage to corruption. It is death and destruction to the veil cast over all faces, the flesh mind. But it is actually life unlike any have any conception of. Jesus is the exact representation of the Father. And He said âFather forgive them for they know not what they doâ. He is love. When Godâs justice fills the earth they learn righteousness. The fire of His love poured out on and through all mankind is the only destruction coming from God. The transforming power of the light that lightens everyman burning through every tare, wood, hay, stubble is the the flames coming from His eyes. And the sharp two edged sword coming from His mouth divides the soul and spirit and lays us bare. I fell as dead before Him. But He said stand up. We believe that if we go up to the fiery mountain we will die. Yet Moses went up and was transformed into a glorious state (although that faded). Well God is bringing the fire down from Heaven. And no you canât escape it. That is the world being saved for fire. It is compared to the flood. A flood of fire. Godâs love cover the earth as the water covers the sea.
That we are now in a unprecedented time of global crisis is the growing consensus of not just religious tribulationists but of atheistic secular scientists and other informed observers. The effects of technological human civilization on the life support systems of the planet has brought on the sixth mass extinction event experienced by life on Earth. Climate Change, the dying oceans (increased acidity and dead zones), destruction of the last remaining wilderness areas, peak oil and resource depletion; are just some of the many threads of the fabric of the Earthâs complex life supports systems that are quickly unraveling.
The Earth is battered, sick and is entering into stage IV of a terminal planetary illness. The mirage of a promised techno-utopia is no more than a delusion that will soon be shattered by the groanings of the long suffering Earth.
ButâŚit is not the end, it is indeed as Jeremy (redhotmagma) has said in his above post, the true beginning. The end is the beginning. The Earth will not be destroyed it will be healed, life will not descend into the abyss of extinction rather even the long lost extinct will be made alive again through the rebirth of universal resurrection. Resurrection (the Life of God) is not just the raising of the dead, it is the outflow of the life energy of God to all things in the universe from the very smallest sub-atomic particle to the galactic clusters of the ever expanding universe. It changes the past and makes what was considered impossible possible.
The judgment of God is, as Jeremy said, is the fire/light which reveals (diagnosis) those things that damage us and the creation and removes that which hinders the free flow of the healing life of God to all things. Judgment serves salvation, it is not in tension with it. To judge is to liberate and set free so that we are free to be healed and more than healed, to be resurrected/born anewâthe ultimate act of healing.
Yeshua (Yahweh liberates) Xristos/Xrestus (Healer)âJesus the Healerâdoes not save the world through a clash of powers (the final conflict), violence and punishment. He does so through liberating and healing, by going down to the place of the captives (all of us) and breaking the bonds that hold us so the we can be free to be healed and made whole.
The true Armageddon occurred at Golgotha. This is something that is so deliciously ironic that it takes my breath away. The mounts Har Moâed (Mount of Assembly) and Har Midgo (Godâs Fruitful Mountain) Zion and the mount of Olives respectively, are what is actually being referred to in the book of Revelation by the transliteration: Armageddon. Har being Hebrew for Mountain and Moâed and Migdo. It has nothing to do with the plain of Meggido in northern Israel mentioned 12 times in the OT. It is a mount not a plain.
Yet this notion perpetrated by many Christians that Armageddon is some sort of climatic super-bloodbath inflicted by Jesus on flesh and blood people is one of the greatest slanders of God that has gained enormous currency in the popular culture. The truth is that Armageddon occurred at Golgotha outside mount Zion. It is there the powers and principalities were shown to be mere tools of the almighty power of death. And all they can offer the world in the end is death.
Yehsua, the true temple of YHWH was not allowed into the holy of holies of the temple on Mount Zion. He was hanged from the tree of death as one cursed and cast out from the holy place. He died near Gehenna the place of the dead and unclean. That tree of death was in truth the tree of Life. Godâs Fruitful Mountain is fruitful because the death of Jesus poured the Life (the blood and water) into the Earth (all the universe) overcoming the almighty power of death by filling it with His Life (YHWH and the Lamb). All will be healed, all will be made alive, because He has freely given all that He is to all that there is.
hmm hrm. So what do you think is the end and do you think you will see it in your life time? I am not asking for a fluffy ambiguous answer, but exactly what did you mean with clarity.
Maybe weâve been watching and reading different ideas of what âpopular cultureâ involves, but in 42 years of seeing popular culture borrow Armageddon notions I donât recall seeing anything about Jesus doing this in âpopular cultureââonly in church. And not so much in church, either! Usually itâs gentle Jesus meek and mild, who would never countenance something like the slaughters of the OT (attributed to YHWH).
That being said, I donât think itâs fair to accuse Christians of slander when perpetrating notions that are quite common in OT and even some strains of NT prophetic imagery. For better or for worse, the âclimactic super-bloodbathsâ are in scripture; believers have to make do with them the best we can. Interpreting the climactic super-bloodbaths as climactic super-bloodbaths may be incorrect, but it can hardly be slander (or even libel ) per se.
For what itâs worth, I do like the connection to Har Midgo as the Mount of Olivesâbut then in the OT, the first climactic slaughter of pagan armies besieging Jerusalem occurs when YHWH touches down (apparently visible and incarnate) on the Mount of Olives, the impact striking the hill into two halves with a new valley curving through it off northward (extending the valley of Hinnom, not incidentally!) into which the bodies of the soon-to-be slain will be buried over a period of months by survivors.
Be that as it may. In ancient times, cities were built on hills, and where hills werenât available artificial hills were made. Thus the theory that the reference is to a city on the plain, or even to a recently fortified military base. As it happens, there is just such a ruin still visible today on a small hill overlooking a nearby road in the region: it is the Hill of Megiddo (now Tel Megiddo), and a Google search for the related Israeli National Park will quickly return images for it. Itâs a very real place, and we know a lot about it from archaeology and other historical research. For example, it contains the remains of one of the (maybe the) oldest known Christian church in Palestine, with a large mosaic stating that the church is dedicated âto the God Jesus Christâ.
So the fact that RevJohn mentions a hill there isnât actually surprising. Thereâs a very real and very literal hill there, with habitation signs dating back about nine thousand years, and a long-running military fortification on top of it. It guards an important main highway between the Mediterranean Sea and the Sea of Galilee. I gather that theories are divided about whether the hill is natural or an artificial âtelâ built up very long ago. (From what I can âtelâ , my guess would be both, although the build-up might be accidental as new construction sits on top of old construction.)
The Carmel range of (natural) hills is also near the region, and Mount Carmel has been another longstanding second guess about Har-Megidon. But Tel Megiddo is the most logical option.
I am well aware of the points of fact that you raised. I researched this carefully because I knew I was positing an interpretation that was not widely accepted. The Tel of Megiddo is a mound of only 15 acres and 40-60 m in elevation and by no stretch could it be considered a mountain. shalomil.com/places/tel-megiddo
If you are looking for a more in depth technical discussion of the identification of Armageddon you can find it here in a series of five articles: http://www.logosapologia.org/?p=2527
A brief quote from the author: This may come as a shock to many of you but a principle tenet of this treatment is that Armageddon has nothing to do with the valley of Megiddo. Bear with me, I realize this might challenge some long held prophetic scenarios but it is actually more coherent with scriptureâŚThe ten thousand pound elephant in the room is that there simply is no such place as Mount Megiddo. In the Bible, Megiddo is twice represented as âthe plain of Megiddoâ (Zech 12:11; 2 Chron. 35:22). I donât share the authors apparent stance that there will be an actual climatic battle of Armageddon at the end of history. I only cite his article for his discussion of the identification of Armageddon as a geographical location.
The clincher for me is not the various points of geographical and historical facts, rather it is that the death and resurrection of Jesus occurred at Jerusalem in the vicinity of the mounts of Har Moâed (Mount of Assembly) and Har Midgo (Godâs Fruitful Mountain) Zion and the mount of Olives. It is the presence of Jesus and what he experienced there that defines the true meaning and significance of Armageddon. The Book of Revelation is not just the revelation given to Jesus it is also the revelation of Jesus who is the revelation of God.
Oh, okayâI see what youâre talking about now. I was thinking âpopular cultureâ in the sense of the entertainment industry referring to Armageddon. Jesus is practically never a factor there.
If Jesus (and/or the Father and/or the Spirit, since where one Person is in operation all Persons are in operation) inspired the OT or even NT prophetic imagery, then Theyâre the ones who characterize Themselves acting out against creation with violence. Thus, even if the interpretation of what is inspired by Them about Them is wrong, it canât be slander or libel per se.
If the prophetic imagery of the OT and the NT isnât inspired by God, where it directly claims to be inspired by God (keeping in mind there are different kinds of inspiration attested to in the scriptures, but this particular kind of material is presented as being more directly inspired than most), then we shouldnât be referring to that imagery for any purpose, even if we think we can interpret it more favorably to Godâs character than we think the imagery would allow on the face of it.
Except that a lot of the imagery, even on the face of it, turns out to be truly vindictive (vindicating His rebel people) and truly retributive (bringing rebel sinners back into loyal tribute), thus also restorative and reconciliatory. And most of the toughest language in the NT comes from Jesus directly one way (the Gospels reporting His teaching) or another (RevJohn).
âHarâ doesnât have to be considered a mountain by any stretch, especially in relation to a surrounding plain. The âmountâ of Olives isnât considered a mountain by most standards either, even though itâs taller in elevation relative to its surrounding area. Itâs only 80m taller than the nearby Temple site, and photos of the area show quite gentle slopes of the nearby area. The Tel of Megiddo is actually more strikingly elevated compared to its surrounding areas! (Possibly due to artificial shaping of the slopes for military defense purposes, plus or minus erosion factors over the centuries.)
The link to the cited article is interesting, but the author neglects to mention that the âmeasley artificial hillâ was artificial precisely for purposes of creating a secure military base and staging area for activity elsewhere. Thatâs a safe rear-area staging ground for a siege on Jerusalem, in the heart of an area that invading armies would want to pillage anyway: which is exactly what they are doing in the OT texts cited in the article.
By the articleâs own admission, âHar Midgoâ is just as much of a problematic guess at translation as anything else he offers. Also, it would refer to Zion, the Temple Mount, not to the Mount of Olivesâwhich is better for your theory than for his, admittedly. But I wouldnât try to build anything on that translation as a clincher. The Har Moâed translation has more going for it, which would again refer to Mount Zion but not the Mount of Olives.
I think you meant ânot just the revelation given to Johnâ.
I would have an easier time accepting your theory if the contextual details, including in conjunction with OT refs to what appears to military action by YHWH, could be shown to match up reasonably with the crucifixion. (And I suppose the resurrection??) The current lack of contextual synchronization in the scriptural accounts themselves is what clinches against the theory for me. What I mean is that I can read the RevJohn account of the woman clothed with the son and understand that itâs a poetic reference to the birth of Christ from Mary and/or the birth of the Christian church from righteous Israel (and/or maybe even the birth of the Christian church from rebel Israel!) Even if that interpretation happens to be wrong, I can see that does make sense with the poetic imagery as such. Same thing with various ten-horned dragons representing world systems like Imperial Rome or whatever. But I canât synch together the referent imagery connected to Armageddon with the crucifixion, even after reckoning the imagery as poetic color.
(There are most likely threads on this forum already devoted to the topic, but Iâm busy enough on other things that I have to make somewhat arbitrary selections about what I will and wonât spend time on. If you link to such a discussion Iâll be interested to read it, though.)
The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servantsâthings which must shortly take place. And He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant JohnâŚ
Yes, the tough language is always for the religious people whose teachings show God as vindictive, picky about âsinâ, and more concerned about the scriptures than the real Word of God.
Indeed I see that you and Dave are correct!âthanks for being picky!
As I myself have argued extensively (being picky about the context of those scriptures) numerous times. Although I donât recall them being more concerned about the scriptures per se than about their traditions concerning interpretation and application (which Jesus explicitly criticizes them on). Also, they tend to be criticized about God not really being âvindictiveâ (vindicating His rebel people, whoever those people are).
The tough language, however, does refer to people other than the Jews (not always themselves religious leadersâor Jesusâ own disciples and apostles for that matter!) Otherwise there would be no ironic surprise to being assigned a place with the unbelievers. Those who insist on continuing to fondle their sins are not always picky religious people (the sinners in RevJohn could usually have stood to be rather more picky religiously ); and the only people in the New Testament (or OT for that matter) who come up with extensive detailed lists of sins are Jesus, Paul and John. Jesus and Paul both go farther in being picky about what counts as mortal sin than their Jewish and Christian audiences are expecting!âeven though they donât regard a failure to keep the hedge-rules around the Law as sin.
Itâs true that when they go farther than expected, a main purpose in doing so is to explode Jewish and Christian expectations about ourselves as being spiritually superior to those-people-over-there. But that purpose only works if we take them seriously about such unexpectedly âsmallâ sins really being just as condemnable as the âlargerâ sins.
In the end we all (Judeo-Christian, pagan or alt-theist, pantheist or atheist or agnostic) radically depend on the ongoing mercy and justice of God, none of us moreso or less so than others, in favor of us personally although against our sins (however large or small those sins may seem). And love, as they say, fulfills the Law.
I was thinking âpopular cultureâ in the sense of the entertainment industry referring to Armageddon. Jesus is practically never a factor there.
Although I donât recall them being more concerned about the scriptures per se than about their traditions concerning interpretation and application (which Jesus explicitly criticizes them on). Also, they tend to be criticized about God not really being âvindictiveâ (vindicating His rebel people, whoever those people are).