I believe that there are two main reasons for this. I have actually thought quite a bit about this as I have always been intrigued with the apocalypse and my father is totally convinced that we are in the "end of days".

First, I believe that it is kinda an ego thing. That being part of the "end of days" in some way makes them important or special. And if we know anything about human nature, people like to feel important and special so they seek out ways to validate this.

Secondly, I believe that on a deeper level that the apocalypse justifies or confirms their beliefs. If in fact we are in the end of days and this can somehow be show to be true objectively, then Christianity (and by extension their personal beliefs) are shown to be true. Now of course they completely dismiss the fact that many religions predict someone sort of end of the world and none of them are pretty.

Of course to be fair, if the 7 signs of the apocalypse did happen in accordance to Revelations, it would be pretty strong evidence for Christianity, imo. But so far there has been nothing even close.

that is my armchair psycho analysis for the day.

Pretty sure the antichrist is supposed to be Jewish, isn't he?

Obama is one dark skinneded Jew, that's for damn sure.

Doesn't the bible itself convey the impression that this is to happen soon (soon being relative to whenever you're reading it I suppose)?

It talks about the kingdom of God being at hand, but that is something different, but often confused.

You saying there are no dark skinned Jews?

Jesus said you'd see his return before the generation passed away, didn't he?

Also, Revelation was never meant to be taken literally (See: anything ever written about the genre of Jewish apocalyptic lit). Would make a cool movie though, as long as it didn't star someone ridiculous like Kirk Cameron.

I could be an ass like Splendour and report this, but what I really want to know is if anyone actually thinks I'm more idiotic than JD. If so, I will stop posting in RGT forever. Thanks.

It's not possible to be more idiotic than JD.

Fwiw i don't think you're an idiot but im an idiot so that might not count.

When you make posts like this one.... you are.

No.

Yes



Infinity.

OK, while I agree with you here, I'm going to disagree in the sense that it wouldn't be "a great deception" if everyone were to agree that there was "pretty strong evidence" on the table.

What I'm saying is that there will be at least one (and possibly multiple) alternate hypotheses for the signs of the Apocalypse. These alternate hypotheses are going to sound very good, too.

Pope John Paul II believed the apocalyptic prophecies contained in the Secrets of Fatima were going to begin unfolding at the end of the 20th century.

He knew there was at least one more pope according to St. Malachy's Prophecy of the Popes, right?

Regardless of what the Pope did or did not know about the Malachy prophecy, the Vatican perceived that the Fatima prophecy was absolutely bounded to a deadline of the year 2000 for events of prophetic relevance to commence.

There's plenty of ways of receiving attention that don't include spamming RGT JD

Like, for example, making up stories about how they're the special chosen children of a man with magical powers that loves them more than everyone else?

Ummm there's a reason its called the Second Coming.

Jesus did come and was on the Earth 40 days between his Resurrection and his Ascension.

How come if you've done such extended theology/pastor studies this escapes you?

See the Chrysostom quoted interpretation of the word "generation":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olivet_discourse#Imminence

Also the Talmud version of the End Time is very similar to the Christian one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End_time

He hasn't done any studies...ya silly.

The Pauline Epistles and other texts in the bible written from a viewpoint after jesus's supposed ressurection state that the endtime is near. How come if you've done such extended theology/pastor studies this escapes you?

You mean Judaism and Christianity are closely related? No way, its almost as if one sprouted from the other.

LOL...

Did Jesus come back after his crucifixion or not?

40 days is a pretty significant amount of time for him to have walked among his followers.

You can study Jesus' parable of the fig tree. Maybe you'll get lucky or even better: blessed.

Ummmmm, my guess is not.

Except that there was an oral tradition with a lot of living witnesses corroborating the report of his resurrection at that time.

Plus the Gospels were written and distributed while many of his followers were still living to contest. Yet there's no dissenting account from among his followers.

We do have corroboration he lived (at least pre-Resurrection) from both historians and his opponents.
Historians: Josephus and Tacticus. Opponents: the Pharisees who mention him in the Talmud.

You went off track again. I will later create a thread about this and we can discuss it. You ignore the point of the Pauline Epistles and parts of the Gospel which were written with the idea that Jesus had already resurrected.