END TIMES?

Introduction

Disclaimer - This study is a compilation of information gathered from Scripture, historical documentation, archaeological evidence and some of my own theory. To the best of my knowledge, all the facts quoted are in the public domain.

I have decided to make this study available as "public domain". This study, or portions of it may be copied / posted / translated and made available in the public domain for any person who wishes to share this information. I will not claim any ownership of any truth I may have uncovered in the course of my studies.

As has been given freely to me, I give freely to others.

End Times?

Now, among all my Bible study theories, comes another subject I've been pondering (as well as studying off and on) for a while now. How close are we actually to the end?

Now of course I know "no man knows the day or the hour". Jesus himself said he didn't even know, or at least he didn't know at a certain point when he was walking this earth. (Tis conjecture on my part here but, I think He probably knows now.)

Anyways. How close are we.... really? Are we a couple of years away, a couple of decades, a couple of centuries, or even another thousand years? Is there even a way of knowing?

Through most of my Christian life (as well as what much of church history has taught); I believed most of Scriptural prophecy was related to Christ's first coming, along with events that occurred in the first century. For the most part, I still believe this. As I look at different Scriptures though; where the possibility arises that we may be seeing certain "prototypes" (as in the "new heavens and new earth" prototype idea that I'd presented in "theories on the afterlife") or passages with multiple layers of meanings? I start to wonder?

Historical Context? How important it it?

Now before I even started to take a more in-depth look at the passages in question; I spent a lot of time pondering what made the most sense in historical context. I read through several texts, as well as reading up on theories both past and present.

First thought that came to my mind: what if we could suddenly teleport a first century Christian into 21st Century America, who had an average knowledge of Christ, with adequate exposure to 1st century Judaism, but a good understanding of faith. What would they have readily recognized that would have been culturally relevant both then and now? What interpretations would have been totally foreign to them? What of current times would they have taken recognizable note of and what would have struck them with great apprehension as a "sign of God's impending judgment"?

This question is important as to recognizing how they may have understood both Daniel and Revelation, that would have been different from most current interpretations. The thing that I find most lacking about current interpretations is that there is no historical consistency with what actually happened when that Scripture was written. Although I understand that "historical consistency" is not the be all and end all of understanding Scripture; God also doesn't work in a vacuum where all things related to a given "time" are isolated from the past.

For example, if we started talking to a 1st Century Christian about the Roman Catholic Church being "Babylon the Mother of Harlots", they would have looked at us like we'd just grown two heads. There was no Roman Catholic Church when Revelation was written and since they were the generation who'd received the book when it was written, as it had been written, the book of Revelation (was intended to) and would have made at least some sense to them; (even if they didn't understand all of it). This is why I think we get some clues from the Scripture (such as Babylon being Jerusalem.) Those things made contextual historical sense to them and that's why these snippets of interpretation made it into the Scripture.

So considering historical context and consistency, what would a quasi-gentile Christian recognize today, both doctrinally and of cultural elements?

Christianity:

1. Most basic fundamentals of faith. (death, burial and resurrection of Christ)

2. Requirement of belief on Christ. (reliance upon)

3. Repentance from sin.

4. Doctrine basics.

Some understanding of the Hebrew concept of "Son of God" meant that besides the "Father in Heaven", Jesus is also Divine and so is the Spirit of God.

Some understanding of monotheism.

Some understanding of Divine retribution for sin.

Belief in both heaven and hell.

Belief in a physical resurrection from the dead.

Belief in a second coming.

5. An understanding of a need for assembly for worship.

(Most of these elements are covered in the "Apostles' Creed".)

Culture:

They certainly would have recognized Greco-Roman cultural elements in western societies, such as governmental systems, and venues of public discourse. Attitudes of sexual morays would not have shocked them, nor would the materialistic nature of American society. They also would have recognized the "military industrial complex" required for "empire building".

Ideas of "freedom of religion" also would not have shocked them, but I think they would have been surprised of how homogenous most American religious beliefs are. (Roman society was religiously more diverse.) They may recognize modern concepts of patriotism as a type of replacement for emperor worship.

Things that would have culturally surprised them would have been the lack of obvious class structure and the general egalitarianism of western society. Women have rights, children have rights, (even animals have rights) and there are no legal slaves. They also probably would have been surprised by the overall literacy of society and (depending on what stratus of Rome they'd come from) impressed with the concept of education for the masses. Of course they would be impressed by our advances in technology and most notably amazed by the cleanliness of cities and advancements in medicine.

On the flip side of this, they probably would be a bit perplexed by ironies like "going to the gym" for lack of manual labor in everyday life, as well as the general impression that people have gotten "soft" and/or lazy for all the labor machines now do for us. Also of notable difference would be attitudes on crime, punishment, civil interactions of races and nationalities in the public marketplace and discipline of children.

Judaism:

A first century Christian would certainly have recognized Judaism's presence in modern western society; but also recognized that modern (Rabbinic) Judaism is the "far right" Pharisaic version of first century Judaism. Once the temple was destroyed and the Sadducees disappeared; the balance between the two schools of thought also disappeared and all Jewish law and history came to be interpreted through one set of glasses.

Taking into account that the subject of Judaism as it related to Christianity, was a topic of considerable debate in the 1st century church; a first century Christian would have likely found modern Christian support for a people and nation who still do not recognize their Messiah perplexing in the very least. Keep in mind that it was the Pharisees whom Jesus had the most negative interactions with and ultimately, they were the group who sought with the greatest fervor to crucify him. Besides this glaring inconsistency, a first century Christian who'd done any digging into the political, economic and entertainment / media structure of American culture, would be scratching their heads as to why is this group of people running your society?

So, with those questions in the back of our minds; let's start looking at some Bible passages and see what we come up with.