Darkness, Among Other Things
Posted in Bible, Prophecy on | 5 minutes | 7 Comments →
Discussions of scientific realism vs. anti-realism aside, it’s commonly accepted that fulfilled predictions increase the likelihood of any given theory being correct. This is one of the reasons I accept Christianity and reject most of the tenets of other religions.
Say you’re a young child living in a house with brothers and sisters. Your parents always tell stories about the grandfather you’ve never met. Though you’ve never seen him with your own eyes, you believe that he exists because you trust your parents and they claim not only to have seen him, but walked with him; touched him even. Your parents assure you that he is going to return one day, and they give you signs to look for, signs which will mark the time shortly before his arrival. One of the signs is that the lights will go out.
As your parents get older, they tell you that they are going away and remind you of the signs to watch out for. Many moons pass. Some of your brothers and sisters begin to doubt that grandfather exists at all. A few even start to insult and belittle you for holding onto the belief your parents instilled in you.
“That’s impossible,” they scoff. “The lights have been on every single day since any generation can remember. To say that one day, the lights are going to just go out is ridiculous. This is just irrational nuttery,” they declare, ever-so-confident in their own understanding.
Then, that day comes: the lights go out.
“See! I told you our parents were telling the truth,” you reply to your siblings, feeling somewhat justified.
“Not so fast,” your siblings retort. “You see, we’ve been studying about this thing called electricity, and we think that’s why the lights went out. It doesn’t have anything to do with grandfather returning. It’s just the result of a mechanistic house following well-described, mindless laws of physics!”
This scenario sounds awfully familiar, doesn’t it?
After all, anyone who’s spent a non-trivial amount of time in (a)theist trenches has heard who-knows-how-many iterations of this same semantic argument. The thing is, the siblings are misguided. They’ve bought into a false dichotomy. The factual workings of electricity are not mutually exclusive with the prediction that the lights will go out. That the siblings can offer a theoretical, “naturalistic” explanation for the darkness has no bearing on the prediction. Their explanation exists despite the fulfillment of the prediction; it is not a counter-explanation for it.
Why am I writing about this?
The main reason is that December 21st looms, and while indulging in the guilty pleasure of YouTube, I came across a video of Japanese Princess Kaoru Nakamaru. Among many other things, she states that Earth will undergo three days of darkness during this time of transition to a 5th dimensional planet. Her video caught my attention. Her claim fits right along with so many other interesting headlines I’ve heard about 2012: the bunkers for the elite, FEMA depleting the supply of emergency food rations, etc.
Do I believe that Princess Nakamaru is correct? I don’t know, but, we’ll soon find out. Though I’m the first to admit that prophecy and nuttery unfortunately go hand-in-hand these days, we should all be paying special attention. In fact, we should expect the nuttery if the Bible is true. As was done with Christmas, what better way to obscure a biblical truth than offering counterfeits so silly they’re worthy of mockery? Make no mistake, I’m not blasting Princess Nakamaru as a loon. I don’t think it’s loony to posit large-scale disruptions of the natural order. I’m simply saying that Satan gains with every ludicrous, frantic, unfulfilled prophecy flung.
But the fact remains. In Matthew 24, Jesus says directly:
Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. (Matt. 24:29)
Personally, I don’t believe we’re on the tail end of the tribulation, but, I could be wrong. I will not be surprised at all if something very strange happens on December 21st. I also won’t be surprised if that day passes ordinary as ever. That said, I do believe that our generation, or some generation shortly thereafter, will witness the large-scale disturbances prophesied in Scripture. I believe that we are watching prophecy unfold before our very eyes, every day, as we go about our careers and busy lives.
As they have with the rest of the Bible’s fulfilled prophecies, I think many atheists will unfortunately hold their unbelief despite the coming fulfillments. They’ll be like the cocksure siblings, content in their “naturalistic” explanations for the disturbances, looking down on the “simpletons” who accept the accounts of their ancestors. They’ll explain the darkness away, just like they explain away all the prophecies relating to the restoration of Israel. Then the end will come, and then it will be too late. Believers need to keep watch, too, lest they be found lacking when that day comes. The scientifically-minded are correct about the power of predictability, and that’s just another reason that I accept the Bible.
Oh, whatever happened with grandpa? He showed up. Turns out he’s a joker with a knack for cutting the power to the house.
Bob Prokop
says...“I do believe that our generation, or some generation shortly thereafter, will witness the large-scale disturbances prophesied in Scripture.”
CL,
I’ve always been highly skeptical of the idea that the “end times” are just around the corner. For several reasons:
1. I believe that most of John’s imagery was referring to events in the First Century A.D. (e.g., 666 refers to the Emperor Nero).
2. It makes little sense for scripture to tell all believers of all times to keep alert for events that will only occur to some believers at one specific time. Therefore, I hold that the imagery was deliberately written so as to be relevant to all times.
3. Just as people used to think that the creation event occurred only a few thousand years ago (due to an overly-literal reading of Genesis), but now are comfortable with the idea that the universe has been around for billions of years, we will eventually be reconciled to the idea that the “end times” are billions of years into the future – with no contradiction to scripture (due to reason number 2).
Syllabus
says...I’m with Bob on this one. The whole “biblical prophecy” thing is… well, there are few indications, either within the texts themselves, the communities that produced them, and the tradition that has interpreted them that justify a “futurist” reading of these texts, and there are substantial reasons to think that the Revelation of St. John should be read as apocalyptic representations of then-present realities – the persecution that resulted in John’s exile to Patmos – that carry eternal truths about the persecuted Church, rather than some vague prognostications that have been useless for the last 2 millennia.
cl
says...Hi Bob. Hope you had a nice holiday. Not that we always have to agree, but, I don’t share your skepticism here (though I think I agree with the general caution you seem to be endorsing; we’ll get to that later). For example…
Some of it undoubtedly was, but that doesn’t nullify the parts that don’t refer to first century events. Also, John’s are not the only prophecies in Scripture. So, to me, just because *SOME* of *ONE* prophet’s writings refer to first century events… that isn’t a good reason to doubt an impending end.
I strongly disagree with the first sentence. Obviously, God thought it made sense to foreshadow the New Testament in the Old, so, for me, Scripture casts doubt on your feelings here. I would agree that many prophecies seem deliberately written as to be relevant for all times, but I don’t think that justifies your first sentence. Some parts of the Bible are specific, others general. This is no reason to doubt an impending end.
I definitely don’t share that opinion. To me, that creation occurred thousands (vs. millions or billions) of years ago, that’s not even off the table. One can also “over-literally” read scientific data, and it’s quite easy to conflate facts with inferences regardless of whether we’re reading the Bible or data.
But I think I can agree with the general feeling of what you and Syllabus seem to be conveying: there have always been people claiming “the end is near” or whatnot, therefore, we should be extra cautious of the extent to which we engage in these types of ideas. I can agree with that. At the same time, I think you might be overlooking certain markers which seem to make “the end is near” a much more relevant claim in 2,000 AD than say, 450 AD.
cl
says...Syllabus,
Merry Christmas. I think much of what I said to Bob also applies to your comment, but, as for:
Well, like I said, SOME of it obviously pertains to then-present realities. However, to imply that this should nullify other parts which clearly weren’t meant to be interpreted as “then-present” … or to just overlook those parts altogether … that strikes me as a bit reckless.
Syllabus
says...And the same to you.
Which ones, specifically? I suspect you mean Daniel. I’m mainly speaking of Revelation, which is the one most often used, along with bits out of some of Paul’s epistles.
Syllabus
says...To clarify, the reason that I think your predictability idea is defective is that, for the most part, the only event putatively prophesied by Scripture – the Incarnation – is really only retrospectively fulfilled, if you get what I mean. All other attempts have, to my knowledge, failed miserably. Predictability is only a good metric for the qualities of a theory when the predictions are relatively unambiguously reachable from the data.
cl
says...Syllabus,
Sorry for the delay in response. I was speaking mainly of Revelation, myself, since that was the context you established. There are parts of revelation which pertain explicitly to St. John’s day, and there are parts that pertain explicitly to the future. Right?
Though I’m not sure what you mean by “putatively prophesied,” I’m pretty sure I disagree. You must mean something I don’t understand. On my view, there are many events clearly prophesied in Scripture besides the Incarnation. As just one example, the re-establishment of Israel as a nation. There are many others.
Why do you say only one event is “putatively prophesied” in Scripture?