Christianity and the End Times

I am open to there being a spiritual state that makes such experiences possible instead of dismissing them.But then, what's next?Let's say I'm not (currently) able to access this spiritual state.
Let's say you and Phat and many other Christians are.So, I'm sitting in my non-spiritual-accessible state.
I believe that you and Phat and many other Christians may have access to a spiritual state that I cannot fathom.I look at you and Phat and all the other Christians with access to the spiritual state to see if there's any difference to the way your lives go than the way my life goes.
And the answer is... you and Phat and all the other Christians with access to the spiritual state are... perfectly average.Some of you are great, some not-so-great.
Some of you are nice people, some not-so-nice.
Some of you are rich, some not-so-rich.
Some of you are happy, some not-so-happy.
Some of you are smart, some not-so-smart.
Some of you make claims of the afterlife and other things that cannot be confirmed, some do not.And it looks exactly as average as all the people that you-and-Phat-and-all-the-other-Christians-with-access-to-the-spiritual-state say do not have access to the spiritual state.Non-spiritual-state people are also perfectly average:Some of them are great, some not-so-great.
Some of them are nice people, some not-so-nice.
Some of them are rich, some not-so-rich.
Some of them are happy, some not-so-happy.
Some of them are smart, some not-so-smart.
Some of them make claims of the afterlife and other things that cannot be confirmed, some do not.So, here I am in my non-spiritual-state.You say you have access to a spiritual state that does... absolutely nothing to separate you from any other average person on the planet.To me, your spiritual state (even if it does exist) does not seem like anything anyone should be aiming for anyway.I only have this one life. I would like to be more than average, if possible.
This spiritual-state you claim to have is left... wanting. Just like many other people's claims of special-status they have that they cannot verify.Special-status claims that can be verified, however... like being a doctor, or serving in the military, or being a genius inventor, or being a selfless, loving parent... these (and other) special-states-that-can-be-verified all provide much information that show they can take you to places beyond the average.Therefore, why wouldn't I look more to the shown-to-be-above-average special states for guidance rather than then shown-to-be-just-as-average-as-anyone-else "special state" claims?

I agree.
But why would anyone want to?Is it going to help me?
Is it going to help others?
Is it going to help anything?If it's not helpful in any way... why do it?I'm open to the possibility that your spiritual state, reading the Bible, being a Christian... will help the majority be a better person.
But the facts don't show us that direction.The facts show that learning to become a doctor will help the majority become a better healer.
The facts show that learning to become a part of the military will help the majority become a better helper.
The facts show that learning to become a loving parent will help the majority become a better teacher.
The facts show that learning your spiritual state, reading the Bible, being a real Christian... will help the majority to become an average person.It appears that this spritual state doesn't help anything.
So, I'm open that it exists... but I just don't see why anyone would care about it existing or not.

If that's the way you see things, I don't think we experience reality in the same way.
Perhaps this is the spiritual state that I cannot see?Again, I don't see any reason to desire such a state.

I'm not sure if I could.I've never been able to control my feelings. I just have them.
I can choose to use my intelligence to disregard my feelings... but the feeling is still there.Like sometimes I get the feeling that a stranger is going to hurt me.
But (in the correct and safe environment) I can choose to use my intelligence to disregard this feeling, and walk past the stranger without retreating to a safe location. The feeling is still there... I just do the actions I choose to do instead of the ones the feelings tell me to.So, I think I could talk with God every day... but I would still feel weird or delusional about it.If I kept talking to God every day for weeks... months, maybe even years... perhaps it would become more "normal" to me and my feelings of weirdness would dissipate.But that seems like a large time-investment I could be spending focusing on being a better person and helping my family and friends and others.Which again leads to the question... why would I want to talk with God every day?
To get answers?
The facts show us that any "answers" that believers get lead to a life of being average.I'm not looking for answers that lead to being average.
I'm looking for answers that lead to being above-average in helping myself and others. I know of many pathways for such things I haven't had time to do yet.Why take focus away from paths that the facts show will definitely lead to being better at helping others in order to attempt a path that some people claim will help... but the facts show that it doesn't help much (if any) at all?

I see your point.If a human could freely choose, without any pre-determination from God... then that would be making a decision God can't control.
And therefore, God would not be the most powerful thing... this decision-making human could make decisions God didn't want.So, God being the most powerful thing... has pre-determined all decisions and all actions. Because He created it all.Is that the gist of it?Now here's the mind-bender:What's more powerful? Scenario 1
A powerful God creates all humans, creating their minds, their choices, their decisions. Some He has pre-destined to return to Him. Others He has pre-destined to move away from Him.
-This would be the gist of what I described above - God is the most powerful being, creator of all and know-er of all. Scenario 2
A powerful God creates all humans, creating their minds - but not knowing their choices or decisions. Some make their own choice to return to Him. Others make their own choice to move away from Him.
-This would be against the gist of what I described above - God is still the "most powerful" being... but not all powerful. He is the creator of all, but not the know-er of all as He doesn't know what decisions the humans will make.The question isn't which God is more powerful, though.
The question is: Which scenario has a more powerful meaning?Is it more meaningful that God created humans and the ones He pre-destined to return to Him actually did return to Him (of course)?Or is it more meaningful that God created humans and the ones who decided on their own - using their own judgement and their own intelligence - decided that God was amazing and returned to Him due to their own personal decision?That is, is it a more powerful meaning if robots do what they're programmed to do? Or if a being judges for itself that it wants to do what you think it should do?I think the answer is fairly obvious.Results: Scenario 1
-Holds the most powerful God - an all powerful God, and all know-ing God
-Does not hold the most powerful meaning Scenario 2
-Does not hold the most powerful God - God is creator of all, but God does not know-all
-Holds the most powerful meaningCan't seem to have one without the other.
Which do you think is "better?"Edited by Stile, : typos

Agreed.It is quite possible to have a God in Scenario 2 that is also as-powerful or possibly even more-powerful than the God described in Scenario 1.Such a God would make Scenario 2 the easy choice for any "most powerful" God...I was only attempting to keep it as Faith-reasonable as I could guess at and still describe the point I wanted to make

Pretty close, yeah.I didn't intend my "mind-bending" comment to imply I'm coming up with a novel idea.
I intended it to identify something to Faith - that "being in total control" has the unfortunate side-effect of removing most (all?) meaning/purpose.But, I feel like rambling anyway.Here's a paragraph from your link, and my comments if you're interested:

quote:

---

Open Theists argue that people are created to be in meaningful relationships with God and others and as moral beings must have the ability to make real, responsible choices in their lives. Open Theists argue that this cannot be accomplished as long as God exercises exhaustive control of the universe or predetermines the future because this would remove humanity's free will. The counter point to this is that critics of Open Theism say that if God is not exercising meticulous control of the universe, or does not exhaustively know the future, then this would imply that He is not in control and we are not able to completely trust in God's sovereignty. Furthermore, the question remains, will God actually be able to triumph over evil? Open Theists answer these critiques by noting that while God does not exercise meticulous control, he is "ultimately" in control.

---

Fair enough for them.
Personally, I don't know why I was created. I am also only slightly interested in the answer.
I'm more concerned with what I decide to do after I was created.
Although I do agree that "to be in meaningful relationships with others" is something I find highly desirable as well. I agree that one cannot be a "moral being" unless one has the ability to make real, responsible choices. I would agree with this statement about predetermination vs. "real" free will. I don't care about God's sovereignty (I think? What, exactly, does this mean?). So I'm not exactly moved by this counter-point and I agree with the position taken by the Open Theists on this point. Is this the crux of "God's sovereignty?"
Regardless - God's triumph over evil is irrelevant to me. I don't care.I would still try to be good, and want to be good even if God (and the universe, and everything/everyone in it) was absolutely destined to "be evil."I try to be good because I think it's the right thing to do, not because I think it's going to be the "winning side."
The point is to do what you think is right... not to try to win some game. This sounds like it requires further explanation.
Taken at face-value, it seems to have a high possibility of being self-contradictory.
But, as I said above, I don't care about God's sovereignty or if God will win (or not) over evil. So maybe I just don't have any interest in figuring out the details of this statement.Not sure if this is what you're looking for or not, but... have fun! Edited by Stile, : Adding remainder of message

That's exactly the point.If God can't NOT be in control of everything... then it's impossible for anyone to ever freely (apart from God's control) choose to want to be with God simply because they (individually and totally apart from God) want to.
-Here, God misses out on an extremely powerful concept - the concept of an intelligent being deciding to love another when there is absolutely no control over them in any way to do so.And if God could create a being that is completely apart from His own control... then He could see whether or not such a being might choose to want to be with God of their own decisions.
-Here, God can partake in the powerful concept of an intelligent being deciding to love another when there is no other control over them.
-However, here, God MUST NOT be in control of everything... otherwise the meaning of another-intelligent-being-with-no-control-over-them-choosing-to-be-with-God is lost.I'm not saying reality is one way or the other.
I'm simply saying that reality cannot be both. And if you're claiming that God "can't NOT be in control of everything..." then you have to accept that God cannot experience the powerful meaning of having some other intelligent being choose to love Him without any control occurring over that other intelligent being.

See you in the New Year, Faith.

I agree.I do think Faith is very genuine.
She believes a rapture may very well be imminent. And she wants everyone to turn to her God in order to avoid a poor fate.
That's kind of a nice thing, really.I think her thoughts on it coming sooner or later are more a symptom of her age, though.As intelligent, thinking humans - as we get old, we become more aware of our mortality and possible death. It can be one of the scariest things people have to deal with. If we have a belief system that tells us we will be taken care of by God and a rapture will occur in the future, and a cultural system that ingrains us with a desire not to "miss anything," we end up with a whole bunch of aging, afraid people who don't want to miss the rapture - and therefore think it certainly must be coming "soon." I will admit that if a rapture were to happen, I would not want to be left behind.
Just like I'll admit that if Santa delivered presents, I would want to get one.But I'm not going to be a good person and believe in Santa in order to get presents.
Just like I'm not going to be a good person and believe in God in order to avoid a rapture.I'm going to try and be a good person because I choose to want to try and help others instead of hurt them.I'm not going to waste time on attempting to avoid a rapture or get presents because I don't believe either will ever happen - and that time can be spent more wisely on trying to be a better person here and now. Really good.
Middle age (I'm 40 in October) seems to agree with me well. So far, anyway "Of sorts" can mean a lot of things.Of the religious sort based on ancient prophecy? It will never happen, from any religion based on any ancient prophecy. Such things have proven themselves wrong about reality time and time again. This is not going to be the time they get it right.Of the apocalyptic sort based on human destruction? Possibly even attributed to a religious ancient prophecy? A possibility exists here.
I still doubt it.
-but this is based on my experience of civilization being resilient and making progress.
-of course, history shows many, many times where civilizations thought they were resilient and making progress until disaster struck and destroyed them on a level that could be called "raptur-ish."So a certain level of serious consideration should be given at all times or any time.
When giving serious consideration, though, it's important to base your thoughts on things that can be anchored in reality as much as possible. Otherwise, you could easily be swept away in the fear/worry/anxiousness of shared imagination. Kind of like ouija boards... just on a larger scale. It's pretty easy to rob a house when all the people on the inside are terrified of the ghosts they just "contacted." We have to find ways to focus on solving real problems - not the problems that only exist in our minds. Just the ramblings of a middle-aged man

I think it would make a believer out of me.
Just like I think I would believe in Santa if all the children suddenly happened to get presents from a man in red on Christmas.Of course, thinking about what I might do may not be what I actually do.
People aren't always able to predict themselves given catastrophic situations, I doubt I'm immune to such a human characteristic.But this is what I would assume I would do:-see that Christians disappear in the rapture
-I would feel bad that I missed it
-I would identify that if the rapture is true, then likely God is real and more parts of the Bible are true than I gave credence for originally
-Then I would remember why other things in the Bible are not true - things like Genesis and the Flood and other prophecies that are simply contradicted by reality
-Then I would question all the evidence that shows those parts of the Bible aren't true and attempt to verify that evidence
-Assuming that this evidence hasn't changed - I would become really confused in identifying that those other parts of the Bible really are contradicted by reality, but this one rapture part was not
-I would then start to question the rapture and want to re-examine that evidence
-Assuming that Christians did disappear, and the rapture did happen - my confusion would grow
-I would begin to theorize:-Am I the problem? Perhaps.
Perhaps the way I think - the way I reason things is simply wrong. Leading me to false ideas of reality about some things.
If so - what part is wrong? Is it even possible to change?
There's certainly nothing I can identify now - so I am forced to keep this idea where it's always been - in the back of my mind questioning everything until further information can be identified.
Therefore, the only thing I can do is continue and hope for the best:-God(s) are probably true in the sense of something existing greater than humans Maybe actual God(s)? Maybe aliens? Maybe time-travel? Maybe something unknown and unidentified?I would then be left with, basically, the same questions as now:
-which parts of the Bible (or any religious text) can be identified as true vs. not-true? And the answer would remain relatively the same - use of any reality-testing method like the scientific method
-were Christians raptured for the reasons depicted in the Bible? Or for other reasons that were recorded wrongly or unknown? - unable to currently answer
-should I be happy for them being raptured? Or were they deceived and I should be attempting some sort of rescue, if at all possible? - unable to currently answer-I would also re-affirm myself that I can only make decisions with the information available to me. And, if I was wrong about not believing in the Bible when I should have - there's nothing I really could have done about it. I wasn't dishonest, I wasn't "against God," there just didn't seem to be any reason to believe in any of it - and I was simply wrong about that.
-And if I end up being condemned for being wrong about something I had no way of identifying as correct - well, that sucks
-I would also wonder about the "justice" or "fairness" of such a situation. But, many people die under unfair and unjust circumstances - perhaps I'm just another one of them.
-Or, maybe I wasn't smart enough to "see" the truth and therefore I'm condemned for being stupid - which has also happened to many in the past and perhaps I'm just another one of them.I've failed to solve enough puzzles in my time to know when I could have gotten one - and just didn't see it; vs. I didn't get it because the information wasn't available, or the available information was misleading. If "the Bible" was the source of identifying preparation for the rapture - it would definitely be an "unavailable or misleading" information situation. Regardless of any God or God-like-being(s) with the ability to punish those who didn't "figure it out."And if I was killed with no further information, I would likely die very confused and scared.
Just as I would likely die very confused and scared if Thanos snapped my life out of existence (actually, I might not have time to feel confused or scared if that happened....)But, although they can make for interesting thought exercises - I'm not really worried about such things actually happening.
Neither will happen because neither are based on anything that resembles reality.Just as you are worried about those-who-don't-turn-to-God being left behind in the rapture... I'm worried about you.
I'm worried about you undertaking such fears and worries and anxiousness for no real reason.
I'm mad at the ones who invented, passed along, and continue to promote such wasteful, harmful scare-tactics.Edited by Stile, : Adding more of postEdited by Stile, : Adding remainder of post.

The proof it won't happen at all is that all calls for an end-times based on "feelings of it's imminence" have been wrong for everyone who's ever had those feelings.Thousands and thousands of times - it's been proven that having "a very strong feeling" that the world will end soon is always wrong.The world will end one day, but if it will be predicted it will be by more than "feelings" - it will be predicted by evidence.Things based on feelings are right some times, but wrong most of the time.
Things based on evidence are wrong some times, but right most of the time.It's not a secret.

This all makes Scientology look like the gold standard of reasonable ideas.

I was raised Catholic.
Went to Catholic school and highschool and to church every weekend.Also, friends who lived down the street from me went to a local Southern Baptist church, and their Dad was the Pastor.
I went to their church many times as well while growing up.In highschool, I didn't miss a weekend at either church (my folks liked the Saturday-night mass at the Catholic church... which left me free Sunday morning for the Southern Baptist church).I wasn't an atheist until my college-ish years, I think. Possibly a bit after that.I am all for the good people and good parts that religions can provide - like the communities they build. Church communities can be full of the nicest and kindest of people. Just like non-church communities.
I just don't see the point of any of the extra, unnecessary stuffs.And I especially don't see the point of End Times speculation based on texts that have proven themselves unreliable and vague for various other prophecies.I get torn in these conversations.On one side - I'm very much into letting people do whatever they think is best for themselves - whether that's preparing for End Times or whatever.On the other side - seeing some people get so worked up and invested in something that's just... not real... makes me want to try and help them. Sort of how you want to try and help people turn towards God before the rapture so they won't get hurt.And then there's the level of this being a 'public forum' - which means even though posts are replied-to-someone-specifically, their message isn't always intended for that specific person alone. Which adds a layer of confusion.There's a circular loop in there somewhere that blocks the potential for mutual understanding. And I don't see how to straighten it out. I don't even see where it specifically exists.
Maybe it's one of those things that can't be straightened out.
But it's not good to give up trying completely.

Simply focus the discussion on your best point.One single phrase such as "we can talk about all the rest after we finish this one point" disarms the entire problem you're worried about.
You don't have to answer every single question in one post - and no one expects anyone to - and there's nothing to worry about "looking bad." As long as you focus on your best points, and move along one point at a time successfully defending each one.. it's impossible for you to "look bad" regardless of how many additional points there may or may not be to still go through.And the more you go through defending correctly, the more it will look like you have an answer for "all of them" anyway.Just pick your best point and focus the discussion there.
Don't move on until you have successfully defended it. Only then move on to the next.