- Aug 16, 2014
- 2,915
- 2,726
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Married
The eschatology debate has become a lot like watching professional sports: everyone has some kind of prediction, and no one has any apparent involvement in the outcome.
When my brother taught me how to play chess at the age of seven, I started out by trying to predict his most likely next set of moves and react accordingly. That's how most people seem to approach eschatology, and it's the reason why my brother always beat me. When it comes to predicting the future, either by personal revelation, Biblical interpretation or science, or any other means, the prediction is usually wrong the vast majority of the time. For example, the Amazon rain forest was supposed to be completely gone almost twenty years ago; average summer temperatures were supposed to be 116 degrees Fahrenheit (46.7 Celsius) in my area; the ozone layer was supposed to be completely gone by now, etc. based on what they told me when I was a child. It was all false, apparently.
I might note that I started actually beating my brother in chess when I started considering a wide variety of possible outcomes all at once, and responding accordingly. Therefore, I want to work on a comprehensive plan for dealing with likely outcomes, under the assumption that any single one of the interpretations could be critically wrong or right on one point or another.
So here's what I want from you:
1) Briefly summarize what you believe about the end times. You don't have to present all aspects of it at once. You can address any single part of it, as you wish. I don't want a proof or argument for your belief. I don't need a whole lot of detail. One or two sentences are probably good enough, unless you have a really unusual interpretation that we've never heard of.
2) This one is the most important part. Tell me, specifically, what do I need to do if you are right. Many views of the end times deal with large-scale phenomena, like treaties and politics, and things that I cannot do anything about. I don't care what the president of the country needs to do. I need to know what an ordinary person needs to do about it.
My thought is, based on what I've seen so far, that most interpretations give vague suggestions as to what my personal response should be, at best. At worst, they give me more junk to worry about, which I can't do anything to help. I also have a theory that if we compile a strategy for dealing with the various interpretations that there probably will not be much direct contradiction. In other words, I think I can prepare a response for one possible outcome without hurting my response to another.
Remember, I don't want a debate on the merits of your interpretation. Just tell me what I need to do if you are right.
When my brother taught me how to play chess at the age of seven, I started out by trying to predict his most likely next set of moves and react accordingly. That's how most people seem to approach eschatology, and it's the reason why my brother always beat me. When it comes to predicting the future, either by personal revelation, Biblical interpretation or science, or any other means, the prediction is usually wrong the vast majority of the time. For example, the Amazon rain forest was supposed to be completely gone almost twenty years ago; average summer temperatures were supposed to be 116 degrees Fahrenheit (46.7 Celsius) in my area; the ozone layer was supposed to be completely gone by now, etc. based on what they told me when I was a child. It was all false, apparently.
I might note that I started actually beating my brother in chess when I started considering a wide variety of possible outcomes all at once, and responding accordingly. Therefore, I want to work on a comprehensive plan for dealing with likely outcomes, under the assumption that any single one of the interpretations could be critically wrong or right on one point or another.
So here's what I want from you:
1) Briefly summarize what you believe about the end times. You don't have to present all aspects of it at once. You can address any single part of it, as you wish. I don't want a proof or argument for your belief. I don't need a whole lot of detail. One or two sentences are probably good enough, unless you have a really unusual interpretation that we've never heard of.
2) This one is the most important part. Tell me, specifically, what do I need to do if you are right. Many views of the end times deal with large-scale phenomena, like treaties and politics, and things that I cannot do anything about. I don't care what the president of the country needs to do. I need to know what an ordinary person needs to do about it.
My thought is, based on what I've seen so far, that most interpretations give vague suggestions as to what my personal response should be, at best. At worst, they give me more junk to worry about, which I can't do anything to help. I also have a theory that if we compile a strategy for dealing with the various interpretations that there probably will not be much direct contradiction. In other words, I think I can prepare a response for one possible outcome without hurting my response to another.
Remember, I don't want a debate on the merits of your interpretation. Just tell me what I need to do if you are right.