Apocalypse Soon
Jan. 18th, 2009 03:59 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
vovatI've seen a few mentions recently of the idea that the world would end in December 2012, based on the Mayan calendar. The only problem is that there's no indication the Mayans actually intended this to be the end of the world; it was simply the end of the Long Count, the non-repeating calendar used for dating monuments and such. And even if they HAD thought the world would end in 2012, why would we consider this to be accurate information nowadays? The thing is, it's likely that this apocalyptic concept didn't come about until the twentieth century, when some people who were alive then would be likely to live that long. Of course, there have been a lot of failed predictions for the year in which the world would end. There were a fair number of people who thought it would end in 1000, and the idea that it would end in 2000 was given some secular credence by the Y2K paranoia. The Jehovah's Witnesses thought the world would end in 1844. Harold Camping said that the world would end in 1994, and then changed it to 2011 when this didn't come to pass. It seems like most of the more popular predictions either set the end times in round-numbered years (even though the modern calendar is said to have been based on a reading of an approximate time in the Book of Luke as an exact time, meaning that the two thousandth anniversary of the birth of Jesus most likely took place BEFORE 2000 anyway), or in years that are coming up pretty soon.
I have to say that I've always found end-of-the-world predictions fascinating. One of the best college courses I took was based around various concepts of the apocalypse. What I have to wonder, however, is why people are so eager for the end. Revelation is one of the most interesting books in the Bible, but does it really fit in that well with the rest of the New Testament, and with modern Christianity? The book seems to have been written in a time when Christians were a persecuted minority, so we can forgive somewhat their revenge fantasies against the Roman rulers. And, like a lot of Jews of that time, they thought the end was coming very soon. It didn't, though, and Christians have had to reinterpret these prophecies over the centuries. Now, of course, Christians are no longer a persecuted minority (in most of the world, anyway), making the "you'll get yours, persecutors" tone of the book rather out of place. And really, could the Jesus riding the white horse with a sword in his mouth and battling the wicked be the same guy as the wandering ascetic who urged his followers to turn the other cheek? Sure, people are large and contain multitudes, but it doesn't say too much for Jesus' teachings if he isn't even planning on following them himself. Actually, this puts me in mind of the Hindu Trimurti, in which the Creator, Preserver, and Destroyer are all forms of God. But in the Christian Trinity, if the Father is the Creator and the Son the Preserver (in fact, I learned in my Religions of India class that some Hindus actually consider Jesus to have been an avatar of Vishnu), then who is the Destroyer? I'm not entirely sure as to the role of the Holy Spirit, but I don't think it's a destructive one. Oh, well. All that stuff about different gods all being aspects of a single one are purposely confusing anyway. But getting back to the topic at hand, the idea that people go to Heaven or Hell immediately after they die has become mainstream, so why is an apocalypse even necessary? Eternal bliss for the good and eternal torment for the evil are somehow not quite enough?
I have to say that I've always found end-of-the-world predictions fascinating. One of the best college courses I took was based around various concepts of the apocalypse. What I have to wonder, however, is why people are so eager for the end. Revelation is one of the most interesting books in the Bible, but does it really fit in that well with the rest of the New Testament, and with modern Christianity? The book seems to have been written in a time when Christians were a persecuted minority, so we can forgive somewhat their revenge fantasies against the Roman rulers. And, like a lot of Jews of that time, they thought the end was coming very soon. It didn't, though, and Christians have had to reinterpret these prophecies over the centuries. Now, of course, Christians are no longer a persecuted minority (in most of the world, anyway), making the "you'll get yours, persecutors" tone of the book rather out of place. And really, could the Jesus riding the white horse with a sword in his mouth and battling the wicked be the same guy as the wandering ascetic who urged his followers to turn the other cheek? Sure, people are large and contain multitudes, but it doesn't say too much for Jesus' teachings if he isn't even planning on following them himself. Actually, this puts me in mind of the Hindu Trimurti, in which the Creator, Preserver, and Destroyer are all forms of God. But in the Christian Trinity, if the Father is the Creator and the Son the Preserver (in fact, I learned in my Religions of India class that some Hindus actually consider Jesus to have been an avatar of Vishnu), then who is the Destroyer? I'm not entirely sure as to the role of the Holy Spirit, but I don't think it's a destructive one. Oh, well. All that stuff about different gods all being aspects of a single one are purposely confusing anyway. But getting back to the topic at hand, the idea that people go to Heaven or Hell immediately after they die has become mainstream, so why is an apocalypse even necessary? Eternal bliss for the good and eternal torment for the evil are somehow not quite enough?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-01-19 05:20 pm (UTC)I think with a lot of it, it's not seen as "the end"-- you often here "the end AS WE KNOW IT"-- it's more seen as the end of a cycle (particularly from a New Age standpoint) or the beginning of something new (like the Kingdom of Heaven from a Christian standpoint). For the people who believe themselves on The Right Side of things, it means that evil would be done away with, and that would be a good thing, wouldn't it? I don't know-- personally I'm still not entirely sure what would CONSTITUTE Evil to feel ready for the end myself (does it matter if I'm good enough if my heathen husband isn't? And AM I good enough, anyway?) But with the state of the world environmentally and the fact that people have developed so many sure-fire ways of doing away with themselves, you can see how the world might be needing a complete do-over, as well. That answers your the idea that people go to Heaven or Hell immediately after they die has become mainstream, so why is an apocalypse even necessary?
About the tangent, in the Christian Trinity, the Father is still the Creator, but the Son is referred to as Redeemer and the Holy Spirit as Sanctifier. Compared to the Hindu trinity, I think the Holy Spirit is closer to Preserver in sense, even though I see Jesus being an avatar of Vishnu as making more sense than of, oh, why can't I remember the name of the Destroyer? though if you really want to stretch it I suppose you could see Jesus as the Destroyer, as in the Destroyer of Death, but that's definitely a stretch. The Christian Trinity is definitely focused on positive energy, with destruction more being a lack of the positive than a measurable negative. All that stuff about different gods all being aspects of a single one are purposely confusing anyway. I love one-as-many and many-as-one theologies! But I really can't explain it to anyone else, it's more something I've accepted through a leap of faith-- though I know it was through studying yoga and learning about Hinduism that suddenly the Christian Trinity made sense to me too-- it was like "NOW I get it!" but I can't explain WHY....
no subject
Date: 2009-01-20 12:11 am (UTC)Sure, unless it's one of those cases where you can't have good without evil.
I don't know-- personally I'm still not entirely sure what would CONSTITUTE Evil to feel ready for the end myself (does it matter if I'm good enough if my heathen husband isn't? And AM I good enough, anyway?)
Yeah, I guess one of the thing that bothers me is when people throw anyone who doesn't follow their exact religion into the "evil" category, even if they don't actually do anything bad. I guess my take is, as long as these people that you consider evil are out of the way where they'll never again bother anyone good, why do they need to be totally destroyed?
I think the Holy Spirit is closer to Preserver in sense, even though I see Jesus being an avatar of Vishnu as making more sense than of, oh, why can't I remember the name of the Destroyer?
That would be Shiva.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-20 01:30 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-20 02:07 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-20 11:16 pm (UTC):D
no subject
Date: 2009-01-20 11:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-20 09:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-20 11:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-21 05:38 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-21 12:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-23 04:20 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-20 10:15 pm (UTC)These stupid racist girls (more on that later in my LJ) believe in this. One was whining about not wanting to get married in 2012.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-20 11:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-21 02:15 am (UTC)