::::::::
If proof of humanities profound ignorance of that potential called God were necessary, one Harold Camping, an American evangelical and radio broadcaster, will make it clear once again; he has fixed the date for the return of Christ at May 21 2011. Given that no attempt to fix a time or date, for any act of God, by any religious or tradition has ever proved correct before may be why so very few ever attempt it now and risk the considerable humiliation of demonstrating their own illusions and which itself may provide a general insight into the efficacy of the claims religious make for themselves. An earlier attempt by this same wannabe prophet to predict Christ's return already failed once in 1994. According to him, because of a mathematical error of calculation.But lets humour the idea for the moment and consider more carefully. There are so many potential implications to muse over: If such an event ever does take place in our lifetimes, the 'Apocalypse' that the religious promise will rain down on the rest of us is much more likely to land on their own heads first, hard and heavy! First of all, 'Christian' institutional forms have been cracking up in disagreement for the whole of their history. Beginning with the origins of the Roman church, unresolved divisions started even with the choice of scriptural material that was was to later become known as the Bible. However suggestive scripture material may be, there is no recorded document or teaching of a specific 'revelation' ever being passed on to anyone by Christ or his followers. Most likely because it was always an oral tradition, a moral teaching, to be shared privately between individuals.
In the modern world, religious claims are a dime a dozen. And however one may pay a politically correct lip-service respect to them, history continues to slowly pull the rug out from any creditability they might pretend to. Whether pedophile priests, acts of terrorism, false prophets, the foundations of all religious claims remain questionable. I don't intend making a case here against the potential for God nor in favour of atheism, but I have no hesitation about openly questioning the efficacy of religion as we have understood that term via history. For if there is a God, tradition, instead of bringing us closer has taken our minds far from that reality!
The Christian religion as we know it in all of its forms, ancient and modern, is a theological construct. A human intellectual attempt to comprehend the mind of God. Theology therefore only exists because whatever Christ taught in ancient times is unknown, was lost and nothing has been revealed since. The question is this: is theology, upon which all of Christian/Judeo tradition is founded even a valid human intellectual endeavour? Or just the height of human intellectual pretensions, spiritual vanity and folly? Probably. For that reason history has chronicled 'tradition' breaking up from a single monolith to thousands of pieces during the last two thousand years. And anyone, from scholar to private individual, who opens up a Bible and thinks they understand anything is playing the theology game, and falls into the same trap. And that game may not be as without risk as it appears!
Yet whatever knowledge or insights might be embedded and hidden among the metaphor, allegory and parables of scriptures, it is obvious that natural reason has been unable to penetrate it's secrets. However, these ancient texts are clear and unambiguous about one thing. With more that two hundred references, both direct an indirect, warnings of false teaching, false witness, lying interpreters, anti-Christs and of course the arch deceiver, unexposed and presumable at large, there must be in the world men, organization and institution teaching falsely in the name of Christ.
So any true revelation must provide a path for human reason to recognize and understand the difference between what is from God and what is not. So a right choice can be made among so many completing claims. That key and essential element of understanding is what has been missing from all of religious history. As all tradition is theological, and all is without this key, what can be true if no one is false? But is it possible that everything we have come to understand as theologically based 'religion' is simply institutionalized wishful thinking? I'd put money on it.
Even the name 'Christ' is problematic. We are so used to hearing the expression Jesus Christ as if they were a first and second name. When in fact, the word 'Christ' is a title for the 'one who reveals'. The bottom line is that if a second coming should take place in any form, what must be among the first priorities for such personage is to expose those whose claims are no better than dust. And to do so, such a person would have to 'reveal' a message at odds with all existing orthodoxy? Things could get very interesting, messy and nasty confronting an entire history of human spiritual self deception. Imagining the fall of two thousand years of intellectual and institutional form would be nothing short of revolutionary. But maybe such a revolution is necessary to force a critical self scrutiny of the human condition that humanity avoids confronting or considering of it's own accord, and exposing our 'default' to gullibility and vanity might offer a useful lesson in humility.
So the idea of 'rapture' is down the drain and could quickly become an unexpectedly rude reality check. Any second Christ is not going to welcome any form of 'theological truth' but come to expose it! If that is the case, what might the nature or character of a true revelation be that could distinguish itself so clearly from all human theology, dogma and doctrines? That missing 'key' is the very thing history has tried for centuries to convince us cannot exist: What science, religion, philosophy, theology, psychology, Hawkins or Dawkins thought impossible, a teaching that was itself a fully demonstrable proof of the living God. A teaching that by an act of faith is directly confirmed by that absolute reality. A teaching that delivers the first ever religious claim of insight into the human condition that meets the Enlightenment criteria of verifiable, direct cause and effect, evidence based truth embodied in experience. A moral teaching that represented a paradigm change in the nature of faith and in the moral and intellectual potential of human nature itself; untangling the greatest questions of human existence: sustainability, consciousness, meaning, suffering, free will and evil.
Take a deep breath and think about it for a moment. There is nothing in scripture that contradicts such an iconoclastic idea, and much to support it. Only existing theological traditions don't have such a proof to offer. And as they have throughout history provided the dominant body ideas that make up our conception of God, it is more than just ironic, that none have done more to discredit the very idea of God than religion. People are leaving the churches in droves. And whatever faith may be left is certainly growing thinner.
There are few things other than the secular nation state that have been as destructive and divisive among humanity as religion. The opportunity to resolve the God question, should that opportunity ever exist, must be at the top of any dream list for Progressives. Even if that means questioning what has never been questioned before, beginning with ourselves. The final act of that ongoing tragi/comedy we call civilization may very well be for humanity to discover the greatest roadblock to progress has been and is religion itself.
For all our idealism, neither secular nor religious thought have provided the means to reach out and satisfy the greatest longings of the human soul, have failed to deliver an enduring peace, quench our thirst for a higher justice and provide for a sustainable materialism. We have the dream but not the means. What has held those aspirations prisoner is rarely imagined, but if the catalyst with the necessary authority to realize the Dream were ever revealed, who would care enough to act? Unfortunately, the world has usually preferred the soft, the easy and more convenient paths of intellectual vanity, political correctness and spiritual confectionary than the honesty and courage to confront human nature itself.
The 'world' is what we've made it and that's a pretty big mess. I wouldn't mind seeing the 'end' of it! If that simply means accepting a little help from above! But first we need to discover and know the difference between the illusions of men and the mind of God. Absolutely.
Nothing is going to happen on May 21 2011 Religion is a human fabrication whose inspiration is no more than vain imagination. Yet the aspirations they represent are both real and mostly sincere and deserve better then the existing empty hope tradition offers as substance. Our understanding of ourselves and our universe is far from complete. For all it's pretensions, science has no voice in the God argument, but in the scrutiny of any claims, visible or invisible, they are spot one. Should a time ever come, when the human imperative is to escape the gravity of our own thought and limited imagination, having as little baggage to dump, religious or secular, could be a considerable advantage. Leave a little reserve space within your mind for the unexpected. http://www.energon.org.uk
