So the Rapture turned out to be a bit of a bust.
There are no monster earthquakes, no oceans turning to steam, no fire shooting up out of the ground and, most sadly, no heathen dead rising from the grave to walk to earth in search of brains while Christians ascend skyward on beams of light. It would be easy at this point to do a traditional post-mortem point-and-laugh because that's always what this thing was deserving of -- but there's still something overwhelmingly sad about the fact that there are those out there who sold everything they owned, jettisoned their childrens' futures and wound their lives down to this singular point in time not only because they truly believed that earthly concerns wouldn't matter anymore after today but because not having absolute faith in that notion would damn them for all eternity. These people are now, for lack of a more diplomatic descriptor, thoroughly screwed.
But there's no sense in letting something like that eat you alive from the inside out; there have always been suckers out there and there always will be, gullible souls so desperate for a cure to a life that simply offers too much incomprehensible mystery that they're willing to swallow any form of snake oil peddled in their direction. You can't save everyone, nor should you try -- an ironic statement, certainly, given the topic.
Still, there's something really worth pointing out in the wake of the non-Rapture. While it was easy for most of us to handily dismiss the lunatic predictions of Pastor Harold Camping and his merry band of messianic misfits, what shouldn't be forgotten is just how unremarkable their basic belief-system is. Sure, even a lot of hardcore Evangelicals ridiculed Camping's assertion that Jesus was going to appear out of the sky today, but make no mistake: Whether they choose to say it loudly and publicly right now, as far as they're concerned the only thing Camping got wrong was the exact date. There are millions of people still going about their business today convinced that at any moment they can be beamed up to heaven while the rest of the Earth falls into a period of tribulation that ends in its ultimate destruction. And by the way, these people aren't considered crazy -- they're just called faithful, and deserving of having that faith respected and lent credence by the rest of us. It's fascinating that, really, the only thing that puts Pastor Harold Camping and his followers one step over the line into the world of the insane outlier is that they thought they had figured out the time of Jesus's return, not that they believed absolutely in the notion of a divine entity called Jesus -- or that he would magically appear to us -- in the first place.
If you need it put in more reductionist terms it can be summed up like this: Believing in Jesus Christ as the resurrected son of the creator of the universe who will eventually return to Earth equals not-crazy; believing that you know when Jesus Christ will make that triumphant return equals crazy. See how, well, crazy that is?
When you look at it in those terms it's kind of astonishing how one belief is considered legitimate in our society and worthy of respect -- and one is considered outlandish and worthy of ridicule.
No, the Rapture didn't happen today. But that doesn't mean a whole lot of people won't go on believing that it will happen eventually, that the Bible really does "guarantee it." And that belief is deserving of no less dismissal than the one for which we've all had such a good time mocking Pastor Harold Camping over the past couple of weeks.
Follow Chez Pazienza on Twitter: www.twitter.com/chezpazienza
Lodro Rinzler: An Open Letter to Harold Camping
That being said, I have three very important points.
1) The Bible specifically says that only The Father (GOD) knows when the final judgement will come. That means, Camping can't tell you when the judgement is coming...no man can. It could be today, it could be 200 years from now. Who knows? Only GOD!
2) If you read the book of Revelations, there are a series of events that are going to occur before Judgement Day. Some of these things are in the works, but they have not all come to pass and may not for many years, so again, Camping couldn't have been right.
3) For those who say that the belief of Judgement Day holds many people back from protecting the planet and being productive in society, you have to know that God made us the caretakers over the Earth and the Bible shows many great, godly men and women who were beacons of strength, power and wisdom in their society. Again, it's the proclaimed Christian versus the practicing Christian. If you follow the Word, can have no choice but to protect our planet and help the people.
Besides, there is a certain group of folks that still believes the gullible and weak are fair game.
One man believing something unprovable and unlikely is considered crazy. A small group believing the same thing is a cult. A nation of believers is a religion.
Did I mention that ad populum is a logical fallacy?
The reason that Camping and his followers are "crazy" and others are not is for their specific set of beliefs:
1) Camping et al derive their predictions from a text they believe to be wholly true (not alone crazy necessarily)
2) The prediction of an exact date (like Camping's) is precluded by biblical passages describing the return as a date impossible to know and necessarily surprising (contradiction 1)
3) The decision to stop living life normally (like any other day) even if the date were known is also precluded by instruction to continue working and planning for the future (contradiction 2)
The crazy comes because they hold mutually-contradictory views without acknowledging it. Then they make major (and detrimental) decisions based upon this belief (thus harmful to themselves/others). Other rapture believers may believe in something fantastical (maybe fictional) but it is still a) self-referentially coherent and consistent and b) even if false, generally harmless.
Also to be fair, many evangelicals wouldn't call them crazy just "sadly mistaken and misguided."
I usually look to the latter for explanation as it concerns religion. Typically, religious beliefs are completely irrational, baseless and frequently contradict or bypass the normal rigors for determining truth and fact. That is to say, they don't rely on facts or truth to determine that, for example, God is real. The belief is driven by social discipline stemming from thousands of years of generational social conditioning. The original traditions, rituals etc are going to morph and facts show that they have. There are many different churches stemming from essentially a basic belief in the God of Abraham. This is not unlike what Camping does with his group. It's just a metamorphosis of an already existing paradigm.
Speaking as a non-Christian who loves Jesus.
-Ghandi
Regrettably Chez, does not everyone suffer from this mindless malady? Mi rendition es su rendition. Unless we test it. In which case all are exposed as being completely unique internalised renditions of external reality. An audience member in a debate at the weekend was berating a religious speaker, for accepting belief. When science showed that there was no requirement for it. Fortunately for her, no one asked her if accepted as certainty “The Big Bang”. For if she did, then why was it termed ”Theory” if it was in reality proven “Fact”?
“a life that simply offers too much incomprehensible mystery”
The greatest of which must surely be, why we do not realise that: the chances of solving them are enhanced, through ensuring our kind’s longevity. Realise that, and all else must surely follow.
“how unremarkable their basic belief-system is”.
Yet how remarkable it is, that we do not see ourselves in our reflections on others.
“these people aren't considered crazy -- they're just called faithful”,
or maybe “unquestioned”?
“If you need it put in more reductionist terms it can be summed up like this: Believing”
that every single one of us is not actively practising the process of belief, right this minute.
“it's kind of astonishing how one belief is considered legitimate in our society and worthy of respect -- and one is considered outlandish and worthy of ridicule”.
Although the difference between them, may be little more than the right
: a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena (Websters)
A theory is a post hypothesis, post experimental collection of observations that has not been falsified after multiple attempts. It is not just some "idea."
i.e. A systematic Theory is the scientific version of "fact."
They want our patience. Personally I have better things to do with whatever time I have left than to spend it listening to them, or waiting for?
This is why I am an equal opportunity ridiculer.