Armageddon Now: The End of the World A to Z

By Jim Willis and Barbara Willis

Covering all doomsday prophecies whether by fire or ice, bang or whimper, asteroid or alien, act of God or human folly!

Environmental disasters, ebola outbreaks, war in the Middle East, political riots and upheavals may all be signs that the end times are coming. The timeless notion that the end is near is once again exerting a powerful influence on politics, religion, and pop culture. Omens and prophecies, asteroid collisions and nuclear war, global warming and virus pandemics, alien intervention, act of God or human folly, doomsday prophecies abound within the pages of Armageddon Now: The End of the World A to Z as we speculate how we might soon greet the eve of destruction.

From alpha to omega and predictions from Nostradamus to the ancient Mayans, this tome is packed with 200 entries, 100 illustrations, and an extensive index. Satan, saints, survivalists, and evangelical preachers known for their views on biblical prophecies receive their due. The End has never been so thoroughly covered as in Armageddon Now. It’s the last word for the end user. So, don’t be left behind. Save yourself by buying this book.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Visible Ink Press
• Release date: Sep 1, 2005
• ISBN: 9781578593002

Jim Willis

Jim Willis is the author of 11 books on religion and spirituality in the 21st century, including Supernatural Gods, along with many magazine articles on topics ranging from earth energies to ancient civilizations. He has been an ordained minister for over forty years while working part-time as a carpenter, musician, radio host, arts council director, and adjunct college professor in the fields of world religions and instrumental music. He lives in the woods of South Carolina.

Book preview

ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION

"So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand—then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let no one on the roof of his house go down to take anything out of the house. Let no one in the field go back to get his cloak. How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! Pray that your flight will not take place in winter or on the Sabbath. For then there will be great distress unequaled from the beginning of the world until now—and never to be equaled again. If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened…. See, I have told you ahead of time…. Immediately after the distress of those days

‘the sun will be darkened,

and the moon will not give its light;

the stars will fall from the sky,

and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’" (Matt. 24:15–29)

These enigmatic words, attributed to Jesus of Nazareth in the first book of the New Testament, are some of the most disputed in the Bible.

They certainly ring with prophetic doom. With their images of a darkened sun and moon, and stars falling from the sky, they seem to be describing the end of the world. But what do they mean?

Two poles of opinion anchor a vast spectrum of interpretation. On one end of the spectrum are those who say that all prophetic Bible passages were aimed at the audience who first heard them. Authors of Holy Writ were speaking to their contemporaries, and we must interpret their words by studying history to understand the culture and times—in this case, the first century CE. According to this school of thought, the clue to prophecy is to be found in events familiar to those who first read the words of the prophet.

The theologian Marcus Borg, among others, calls this the past-historic view of biblical interpretation, and it is typical of what is usually called liberal theology.

At the other end of the interpretive spectrum are those such as author and evangelist Tim LaHaye, who insist that biblical prophecy was aimed at future generations—perhaps even our present day. When daily newspapers begin to herald events similar to those described by the original authors of the Bible, then and only then can the prophecies be properly understood. Even the original authors didn’t understand what they were writing about, because those who were inspired to write were transported forward in time to glimpse technological societies they couldn’t possibly comprehend.

This interpretation is called the futurist view of biblical interpretation and is typical of what is usually called conservative/evangelical theology.

Matthew 24, however, presents a unique problem for both interpretive schools. Jesus talked about a time even farther back in history than his own when he quoted the prophet Daniel (see Daniel). But a careful reading of the book of Daniel discloses that the abomination that causes desolation to which Jesus referred is mentioned in three separate chapters that seem to have been written by two authors, one of whom wrote in Hebrew and the other in Aramaic.

The futurist school of interpretation simply claims that Daniel was written by one far-seeing prophet who, using two different languages, described the same future day to which Jesus was referring in Matthew 24. There might be room for coincidence, in that past events may have foreshadowed the future event Jesus talked about, but that only shows that God sometimes used Coming Attractions, as it were, to warn humankind of what will transpire if people don’t shape up. In any case, as far as we know, there have never been any past examples of stars falling from the sky while the sun and moon became dark. So both Daniel and Jesus must have been referring to a day yet in our future.

The past-historic school has a more complicated task. Looking for cultural explanations in Daniel’s day is only the first difficulty. The interpreters also have to read the historical/archeological record to find similar events in the time of Jesus. So the abomination that causes desolation needs a bit of research before we can understand how theologians of the past-historic school see the enigmatic passage of Matthew 24.

First we need to define some terms. There are at least four closely nuanced ways to translate the word abomination from the original Hebrew used in the book of Daniel. The definition most accepted is that of something appalling or detested. Meanwhile, desolation carries with it the idea of stark emptiness. So another way of saying the abomination that causes desolation would be, the detested thing that appalls [Jewish people] so much that it causes them to leave the holy place [the temple] empty.

Darkened sun and moon above the great earthquake from Revelation. Fortean Picture Library.

For those who belong to the past-historic school of biblical interpretation, two such events conveniently stand out. One happened during the time when, according to these scholars, this portion of Daniel was written. The other happened shortly after Jesus’ time.

In 167 BCE, the days to which past-historic scholars believe Daniel 9, 11, and 12 refer, Antiochus Epiphanes of Syria profaned the altar of the temple at Jerusalem. Some accounts say he sacrificed a pig there. Pigs, according to Jewish law, are unclean, nonkosher animals. Others say he erected a statue to the god Zeus. Perhaps he did both, which would have polluted the holy altar and broken the first and second commandments referring to having no other Gods and forbidding the worship of idols. Either act would have been appalling, an abomination that would have caused good Jews to leave the profaned temple desolate or empty.

The words attributed to Jesus could have been a similar historical warning. In 70 CE, shortly before the gospel of Matthew was written, Roman legions under Titus destroyed the temple at Jerusalem, setting off the great Diaspora, the dispersion of the Jewish people throughout the world that lasted right up until the birth of Zionism and the declaration of a Jewish state in 1948. With the destruction of the temple, Jews could no longer correctly worship within the parameters of their sacrificial system because the temple altar, according to the Torah, was the only place such sacrifices were permitted to be offered. The temple site was left desolate.

So those who follow the past-historic method of biblical interpretation believe that the words attributed to both Daniel and Jesus refer to specific historic events. They were written for the people of those long-lost days, to whom these events would have had special significance. The part about sun, moon, and stars is simply metaphorical hyperbole.

The futurists are not convinced. When Israel, during the 1967 Six-Day War, gained access, for the first time in more than eighteen centuries, to the ground upon which their beloved temple once stood (see Temple at Jerusalem), many Jews and Christians rejoiced because they believed that the long abomination that causes desolation was almost over. A new temple could now be built, ready to greet the Messiah—either, for Jews, for the first time, or, for Christians, the second time.

Those who hold this view offer different opinions as to the nature of the abomination that made the temple site desolate. Some say it is simply the presence of the Muslim mosque that sits on the site. Various fundamentalist groups have identified the abomination with the practices of the entire Christian church, the Roman Catholic denomination, the League of Nations, the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the doctrine of the Rapture (see Rapture), the religion of Islam, or the nation of Rome. Each sect tends to claim that the scriptures clearly teach its position, and most quote myriad Bible verses and passages to back them up, utilizing complicated systems of biblical dates and prophetic riddles.

All agree, however, that there will be yet another abomination of desolation. A third temple will be built, and someday the antichrist (see Antichrist) will ascend its steps, declare himself to be God, and demand worship from the inhabitants of the earth. This final abomination will signify the beginning of the end and bring about the final judgment of God (see Revelation) and the battle of Armageddon (see Armageddon, Battle of).

Sources:

Borg, Marcus J. Reading the Bible Again for the First Time: Taking the Bible Seriously but Not Literally. San Francisco: Harper San Francisco, 2001.

Buttrick, George A., ed. The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible. 4 vols. New York: Abingdon Press, 1962.

The Holy Bible, New International Version. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1978.

Lindsey, Hal. Apocalypse Code. Palos Verdes, CA: Western Front Ltd., 1997.

Willis, Jim. The Religion Book: Places, Prophets, Saints, and Seers. Detroit: Visible Ink Press, 2004.

ABRAHAM AND MONOTHEISM

Did the Abraham of Genesis exist? No one knows for sure, but according to Bruce Feiler, author of Abraham: A Journey to the Heart of Three Faiths, it really doesn’t make a whole lot of difference. What is important is the story of Abraham, what Abraham represents not only to modern-day monotheism but to the politics of the Middle East—which, in this nuclear age, can threaten the very future of life on the planet.

Abraham, at God’s command, preparing to sacrifice his son Isaac (right); at the altar (left), an angel stops the knife. Fortean Picture Library.

The great patriarch of the Hebrew Bible is also the spiritual forefather of the New Testament and the grand holy architect of the Qur’an. Abraham is the shared ancestor of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. He is the linchpin of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is the centerpiece of the battle between the West and Islamic extremists. He is the father—in many cases the purported biological father—of 12 million Jews, 2 billion Christians, and 1 billion Muslims around the world.

And that’s the problem.

Historically, when the descendants of Abraham engaged in religious disputes over who was the inheritor of the lands promised by God to the patriarch as recorded in the book of Genesis (see Abrahamic Covenant), warfare was limited by technology. But now we have nuclear weapons to consider. A war in one part of the world, especially as populated and volatile as the Middle East, could quickly escalate into global disaster. And when the United States of America, half a world away from the scene of the conflict, was attacked on September 11, 2001, partly because of its support for Jewish Israel over Muslim Palestine, the battle was brought home to people who thought they were far removed from it.

The modern conflict is rarely couched in such flat assertions as We are Abraham’s descendants and you are not or God gave this land to us and not you. But in the early 1960s the theme melody from the movie Exodus, with lyrics written after the film became a hit and sung by Pat Boone, expressed the deep religious feelings underscoring events that headlined many an evening news program fifty years later: This land is mine, God gave this land to me.

Western audiences, grown used to the political doctrine of separation of church and state, sometimes have a difficult time understanding the deeply religious/political upheaval of a part of the world long familiar with religious argument spilling over into hatred, warfare, and terrorism. Even if the biblical account of Abraham is not interpreted as reliable biography, however, it still points up the fact that the ancestors of today’s opposing factions in the volatile Middle East were arguing about land and autonomy back in the time when the story was first written. And that was a very long time ago, indeed!

The Man

Who is Abraham? Who is this man who continues to have such a profound influence over a world that can’t even prove he existed?

He is considered to be the father of both Judaism and Islam (through his sons Isaac and Ishmael, respectively) and the spiritual father of Christianity, according to Paul’s letter to the Romans, chapter 4, verse 1. Indeed, except for the name of Jesus, Abraham’s name appears more times in the Christian New Testament than does any other.

He is first introduced as Abram (the name means exalted father), living in Ur of the Chaldees, in what is now Iraq. The ancient city of Ur, a Sumerian capital, has been excavated. As a result of archeological work done there, many believe that a people called Hapiru, or Hebrew, lived in Ur until about the time of the biblical narrative, roughly 2000 BCE. They apparently migrated to Haman, in northern Mesopotamia, and then, it is assumed, to Canaan, later called Palestine, now Israel. Critical scholarship, however, like all sciences, is continually in flux, and it must be noted that further research sheds doubt on the connection.

Abraham is presented as a man of great faith, although, like most biblical heroes, with feet of clay that make him disarmingly appealing. The religious call that begins his story occurs in Genesis 12:1–3:

Now the Lord said to Abram, "Leave your country, your people and your father’s household and go to the land I will show you.

I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you;

I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing.

I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you

I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you."

So Abram departed, according to the Bible, without a single word of protest or explanation. This act of unquestioning faith became the foundation for three religions. The story of Abraham as presented in the Bible is the story of the beginning of monotheism, the belief in one God. The three great monotheistic traditions of the world today all trace their origins to this same period of history.

Monotheism: A New Concept of Time

Monotheism introduced important ideas to the world beyond the concept of one God. Considerable evidence suggests that before the advent of monotheism, humans tended to think of time as circular. What goes around, comes around is a concept familiar to Hinduism, Native American belief systems, Shamanism, and Druidism, to name just a few of the polytheistic and pantheistic religious traditions in which time is viewed as having no beginning and no end.

But monotheism postulates a specific beginning. In the beginning, says the first verse of the Bible, God created the heavens and the earth. The Qur’an continues the theme: He [Allah] it is Who created the earth in Six Days, and is moreover firmly established on the Throne [of Authority] (57:4).

Whenever there is a beginning, there is an implied ending. Linear thinking about time is one of the hallmarks of monotheism. Timelines are among its legacy.

Monotheism: A New Concept of Reality

Duality is another aspect of monotheism. The first story of the monotheistic tradition depicts humans with a dualistic choice. They are faced with the temptation to eat of the tree of dualism—the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 2 and 3; see Adam and Eve), of right and wrong. Monotheism gave the world a good God and an evil devil in conflict with each other. Eventually, it insists, good must overcome evil. That’s the whole point of time. Time is the battleground on which Ahura Mazda confronts Ahriman, Yahveh battles the Satan, God defeats the devil, Allah vanquishes Iblis. The long war will end with good conquering evil at a final battle sometime in the future. An Armageddon of some sort marks the end of time.

So Abraham’s story marks the beginning of the end. And there is ample evidence that those who first wrote the story recognized that the cultural conflicts they incorporated into it were already part of the experience of people living four millennia ago. When Ishmael, for instance, considered by many to be the father of Islam, is born to Abraham and Hagar, the obviously prejudiced Hebrew authors of Genesis tell of an angel who prophesies of the young child and his descendants:

He will be a wild donkey of a man; his hand will be against everyone and everyone’s hand against him, and he will live in hostility toward all his brothers. (Gen. 16:12)

When Abraham’s grandchildren Jacob and Esau are born, the ancient Hebrew authors, writing from a Jewish perspective, make it apparent where their loyalties lie in the matter of two future races of Abraham’s descendants. Of Esau, father of the Edomites, who will later be among those called Palestinians, the Bible prophesies:

You will live by the sword

and you will serve your brother.

But when you grow restless,

you will throw his yoke

from off your neck. (Gen. 27:40)

Monotheism: The Continuing Battle

Prophecy and biblical literalism aside, then, the conflict threatening the world today in the Middle East has a long history. What makes the continuing story so volatile, however, is that those who live it today are armed with nuclear missiles. The Christian writer of the book of Revelation placed the final battle for the world, the battle of Armageddon, right in Abraham’s neighborhood. So it seems obvious that even the early Christian movement recognized the old struggle that we still read about in our newspapers and experience in our streets today. The battle has spread from Abraham’s backyard to the streets of New York and the cities of Europe. The children of Abraham are still at each other’s throats, demanding that the nations of the world side with one or the other.

Abraham’s story is not yet finished.

Sources:

Feiler, Bruce. Abraham: A Journey to the Heart of Three Faiths. New York: William Morrow, 2002.

The Holy Bible, New International Version. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1978.

The Holy Qur’an. Trans. with a commentary by Abdullah Yusuf Ali. Beirut: Dar Al Arabia, 1968.

Willis, Jim. The Religion Book: Places, Prophets, Saints, and Seers. Detroit: Visible Ink Press, 2004.

ABRAHAMIC COVENANT

The word covenant means promise or contract. In the case of Abraham it refers to a specific promise God is purported to have made to the patriarch who represented the twentieth generation of humans as recorded in Genesis 12:2–3:

"I will make you into a great nation

and I will bless you;

I will make your name great,

and you will be a blessing.

I will bless those who bless you,

and whoever curses you I will curse;

and all peoples on earth

will be blessed through you."

Are biblical promises binding today to people who do not recognize as authoritative the Bible that records them? To most of modern Western civilization the answer is obvious: of course not. Why should one religion’s scriptures have anything to do, politically, with people of a different tradition? But while Western newspapers continue to describe the Middle East in political language, the people who live there seem more often to express their views in religious terms. Dr. Abdel Aziz Rantisi, who before he was killed in an Israeli missile attack was a prominent leader of Hamas, a group that many in the West consider to be a Palestinian terrorist organization, openly attacked the president of the United States as the enemy of Muslims. A New York Times article published on March 29, 2004, quotes Dr. Rantisi: America declared war against God, and God declared war on America, [President George W.] Bush and [Israeli prime minister Ariel] Sharon.

This kind of language reveals a religious, apocalyptic (see Apocalyptic Writing) view of current events that underlies the political, geographical, and economic wrangling. And we cannot make the mistake of ridiculing only Islamic national leaders who, during the Persian Gulf War, for instance, called America the Great Satan and vowed that Allah would defend his chosen people in the mother of all battles. During those days it was also popular to end every American political speech with the words God bless America. When viewed in this way, the Gulf War was a holy war—God against Allah.

In a similar vein, countless generations of young Jewish boys, at their bar mitz-vahs, have read in faltering tones the words Vayomer hashen el-Avram lech-lecha, The Lord said to Abraham, ‘Go forth.’ Such memories produce powerful religious convictions, to the point that it seems perfectly normal for rabbis in Israel and around the world to say, God gave this land to our father Abraham.

But Abraham wasn’t the first man to step foot on Canaan’s bloody ground. Others were there already. And when the Jews were led away from their beloved country after the first-century CE Roman solution to the Jewish problem destroyed Jerusalem, there were Gentiles who settled back in for a long occupation of the country their ancestors had called home since before Abraham’s time. They were still there when the United Nations, prompted by the rebirth of Zionism, declared Israel a Jewish state in 1948.

So whose land is it, anyway?

Notwithstanding the claims of the Jewish people, there are others who have a scriptural claim upon the land of Israel. The Qur’an of Islam declares Abraham a paragon of piety (16:120). He submitted to God. The word Muslim means one who submits. So to followers of Islam it is perfectly proper for the Muslim presence to declare itself so prominently in the capital of Israel, even if it means that the ancient Jewish temple site is now home to the Mosque of Omar, the Dome of the Rock.

Meanwhile, many Christians believe they ought to have a say in the matter. The Bible declares that God will bless those who bless Abraham’s descendants. Even though President Jimmy Carter’s brother Billy was once quoted as saying, There are a whole lot more Arabs than Jews over there, the typical evangelical/conservative Christian position is that America and the nations of the West had better side with Israel because that is God’s will. Muslims in the region, of course, are well aware of the support of many American Christians for Israel.

It is not by accident that the final battle of the world is usually predicted to take place right in the middle of Abraham’s old neighborhood. The Middle East, from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean Sea and all points in between, has often been the scene of great conflict and warfare. The situation is today made even worse by the fact that much of the world runs on Persian Gulf oil. James Mann points out in his book Rise of the Vulcans that American interests in the gulf and its oil supplies were deemed too important to be left in the hands of a single leader or army in the region. On the other hand, the area’s reputation as a powder keg has often induced caution in U.S. leaders. In a conversation with Donald Rumsfeld, a full-time White House adviser during 1971 and 1972, President Richard Nixon warned the future defense secretary that getting involved in the Middle East carried too many potential hazards for a politician. People think it’s for the purpose of catering to the Jewish vote, Mann quotes Nixon as telling Rumsfeld. And anyway, there’s nothing you can do about the Middle East. This might explain why, years later, Rumsfeld wanted to distance himself from what he deemed a losing cause. Former secretary of state George Shultz (again as reported by Mann) remembers Rumsfeld’s coming back from a 1984 meeting about peace in the Middle East and saying, A just and lasting peace? Are you kidding?

Some political experts believe the first shots of what could very well lead to World War III and possibly Armageddon have already been fired. America publicly condemned Israel for its 1981 preemptive strike against Iraq’s nuclear facilities at Osirak—but one reason given for the American invasion of Iraq in 2003 was that Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction (although no such weapons were found).

In the worldwide reverberation that preceded and followed the invasion, some evangelical Christians began searching their Bibles again, looking for alignments of nations that might be predicted within its pages similar to what they read about in their morning newspapers. The children of Abraham, those who believe they are the inheritors of the Covenant, will very probably remain in the news for many years to come.

Sources:

Barzak, Ibrahim. Hamas Founder Killed in Israeli Airstrike. Associated Press, March 22, 2004.

Feiler, Bruce. Abraham: A Journey to the Heart of Three Faiths. New York: William Morrow, 2002.

Mann, James. Rise of the Vulcans: The History of Bush’s War Cabinet. New York: Penguin Group, 2004.

Myre, Greg. Hamas Leader Calls Bush Foe of Muslims. New York Times, March 29, 2004.

The Holy Bible, New International Version. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1978.

ADAM AND EVE

The final pages of the Christian Bible, concluding with the battle of Armageddon, the return of Jesus Christ, and the destruction of Satan, complete the story that begins in the Garden of Eden, described in the early chapters of the book of Genesis. There, it is written, were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 2:9). When Adam and Eve succumbed to temptation and ate of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, they were banished from the Garden (Gen. 3:22–24). It is often inferred by conservative scholars of both Judaism and Christianity that the purpose was to prevent them from eating of the tree of life and thus living forever in their rebellious state. Biblical history begins with their exile. But at the Bible’s end, in the final chapter of Revelation, the tree of life reappears: Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life as clear as crystal, flowing down from the throne of God and of the Lamb down the middle of the great street of the city. On each side of the river stood the tree of life, bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations. No longer will there be any curse (Rev. 22:1–3).

The Fall of Man, by Hans Sebald Beham, depicts Adam and Eve at the moment before eating the forbidden fruit. Fortean Picture Library.

When viewed in this way, the Bible can be understood as telling either metaphorically or literally the story of the human race between their banishment from the tree of life and their restoration to its presence. The tree of life becomes a set of bookends sandwiching human history.

The apostle Paul, writing in 1 Corinthians 15, builds on this concept as he develops his theory of the two Adams. The first Adam, in Genesis, sins, earning exile from the presence of God. The second Adam, Jesus, when faced with the same temptations, triumphs and, as described in Revelation, returns the human race to its preordained place. (This, by the way, is one reason some Christians think Jesus had to be born of a virgin: both Adams had to have the same father.)

The nature of the original sin committed by the first Adam, the sin that began the long march to Armageddon, is summarized in the New Testament book of 1 John: 2:16: For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life, is not of the Father but is of the world (Revised Standard Version). Note the threefold nature of temptation: the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. Both the first and second Adam, according to Paul’s theology, faced these three temptations. One fell. The other triumphed.

In Genesis, when the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food [the lust of the flesh] and pleasing to the eye [the lust of the eyes], and also desirable for gaining wisdom [the pride of life], she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. Then the eyes of them both were opened.

Jesus, the second Adam, faced the same three temptations. In Matthew 4 he is first tempted to assuage his hunger by making bread from stone (lust of the flesh). He is then shown all the kingdoms of the world and told they will all be his if he worships Satan (lust of the eyes). Finally he is told to show off to all the faithful by leaping unaided from the top of the temple and landing safely, supported by angels (pride of life). To all these temptations Jesus responds by quoting scripture. He passes the test the first Adam failed.

This reading of the story represents a conservative method of biblical interpretation (see Abomination of Desolation; Revelation). It assumes that the Bible is recounting a factual history of the human race and God’s dealings with it. But there is another way to view these passages. If Adam and Eve, the tree of life, and human temptations are viewed as common metaphors for human experience, a different meaning surfaces.

In the final years of the twentieth century, when geneticists began to speculate that the whole human race has as its earliest common matrilineal ancestor one woman in what is now Africa, biblical literalists rejoiced because it seemed to confirm that the Genesis story represented a factual account of history. We all descended from one woman, and her name was Eve. There were problems, of course. Scientists placed her on the wrong continent and much too early in time to fit with the biblical version. That didn’t seem to matter to the faithful. Science had proved that the book of Genesis was literally true (even if the scientists seemed to have played a bit loose with geography and the calendar).

Meanwhile, the great majority of mainline American Christian theologians undoubtedly believe that the story of Adam and Eve was never intended to be a history lesson. Instead, they say, it is a mythological account designed to teach spiritual principles.

Regardless of which view one holds, what is revealed in the story of Adam and Eve is that whoever first told it introduced a whole new way of looking at time and the nature of human existence. This new perspective relates directly to the long march toward Armageddon outlined in the Bible.

Early cultures did not conceive of time as a great river flowing inexorably through something called history. Indigenous religions of the Far East, as well as traditions found throughout the Americas, conceived of time as cyclical or circular, endlessly repeating. Their mythologies consisted of Vishnu sleeping on the cosmic ocean, dreaming worlds into existence, or ancestors who escaped one world to rise into another. Some cultures considered time to be an illusion, a faulty perception by the human race.

But the story of Adam and Eve, first told perhaps eight to ten thousand years ago in the Middle East, introduced something brand new. The two most important elements in the story are represented by the two trees placed in the Garden. Their significance, in combination, leads directly to monotheism and inevitably to Armageddon.

The first tree introduces duality. It is called the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. A religious system involving opposite poles invites the believer to choose one or the other. Buddhism, interestingly, solved this dilemma by accepting both and finding the middle way leading beyond them. But Judaism, followed by the monotheistic traditions of Christianity and Islam, taught that individuals had to choose good over evil to find acceptance with Yahveh, God, or Allah. This choice is represented by Adam and Eve’s eating of the fruit of the tree of duality, the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. As soon as duality is introduced into a religious system, a confrontation between the god of good and the devil of evil is almost guaranteed. If God, Yahveh, or Allah is eventually going to conquer Satan, the devil, or Iblis, Armageddon is just a matter of time. Certainly good and evil cannot compete forever. An end has to come.

And that is the purpose of the second tree. One interpretation of the Adam and Eve story holds that the man and woman were cast out of the Garden to keep them from eating of the tree of life, thus entering eternity in a sinful state. Seen in this way, the expulsion from Eden was a blessing, not a curse. Mortality is a gift from God, not a punishment to be endured.

This idea is illustrated in the final book of the Bible. After Satan is destroyed, after Armageddon is finished, access to the tree of life is restored. Eternity begins anew. Time, it is finally revealed, is simply the battleground on which good and evil slug it out. So it is important to remember that, in the Bible at least, Armageddon is not an ending as much as it is a new beginning. The biblical writers pointed to a new heaven and a new earth, not just the destruction of this one.

This concept is strictly a product of monotheism. Duality and linear time are the hallmarks of this theological system. And Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, the three monotheistic traditions, all begin with the Garden of Eden and Adam and Eve.

Source:

The Holy Bible, New International Version. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1978.

AIDS see Plagues

ALIENS

Our species seems to have a long history of one group inflicting local Armageddons on another. Some anthropologists suggest that when Homo sapiens moved out of Africa into Europe and Asia, one item on their agenda was bringing to an end the race of cousins now called Neanderthal. Neanderthals seem to have been nice enough folk. They had cultural traditions such as religious funeral practices and may even have invented music. But when Homo sapiens moved in, the Neanderthals eventually became extinct. Ever since, it seems, one group of Homo sapiens has come to covet another’s land and moved in to make it their own. Aryans moved west across Europe and southeast into India, bringing to an end the cultural practices of those who were already there. The Romans destroyed the Celts as the Celts had destroyed the Picts, who had destroyed the long-lost indigenous people of the western European islands. Europeans jumped the Atlantic and wrought their own form of Armageddon on the Americas. Eskimos moved in on the peaceful Tunit. Warlike Apaches displaced the peaceful Pimas. World Wars I and II, along with almost every other bellicose conquest of human history, spelled the end to what was, while what-was-to-be hung in the balance.

So it seems built into the consciousness of our species that when the final world map was filled in, defining the geographical limits of our planet, we would turn to the night sky in speculation. Is there another species out there that might try to wreak Armageddon on us? Are there other beings in the universe who might covet the resources of our planet and attempt to inflict upon us what we have so often done to others, even of our own kind?

As William Alschuler points out in his book The Science of UFOs, at least three complete industries have grown up around these speculations: an entertainment industry in the form of science-fiction books and movies; a second entertainment industry in the form of made-for-TV movies that purport to examine the reality of the associated phenomena; and a small industry that consists of support groups and therapists who counsel those who say aliens have abducted them, in some cases for noncon-sensual experiments. This goes to show that, among other things, in America one can commercialize almost anything.

Belief in aliens from space smacks of a religion. Evidence is a matter of interpretation. You either believe it or you don’t. To paraphrase a popular bumper sticker, My cousin saw a UFO. I believe it. That settles it. To many people, proof that God exists is to be found in the anecdotal evidence of others who have experienced the divine. In the same way, say alien activists, too many people have experienced or witnessed alien activity to allow us simply to dismiss the possible reality of planetary visitors. The fact that neither the presence of God nor the presence of aliens has ever been proved under laboratory conditions does not dissuade believers in either.

Some scientists express doubt that, even if aliens exist somewhere out there, they could possibly travel the literally astronomical distances necessary to reach us. True believers in an alien presence retort that we cannot assume to have yet reached the end of technology. After all, a hundred years ago it was widely believed that no one could ever run a four-minute mile, let alone break the sound barrier and walk on the moon. Given the theoretical possibility of cosmic wormholes and parallel universes, who is to say space travel over immense, seemingly impossible distances will not be commonplace someday?

God sends angels. They even make TV shows about them. But aliens send messengers too, we are assured. They have made contact with us. Perhaps the government even knows about them but is withholding the evidence because our leaders fear a general panic among the populace. As a matter of fact, even the Bible seems to speak of angelic messengers using vocabulary similar to that of the latest edition of the UFO Newsletter.

Take, for example, the experience of Ezekiel:

Artist’s version of an alien gray, a type that succeeded little green men in the popular imagination. Andrew C. Stewart/Fortean Picture Library.

I saw a windstorm coming out of the north—an immense cloud with flashing lightning and surrounded by brilliant light. The center of the fire looked like glowing metal, and in the fire was what looked like four living creatures. In appearance their form was like that of a man…. I saw a wheel on the ground beside each creature…. They [the wheels]sparkled like chrysolite … Their rims were high and awesome …Spread above the heads of the living creatures was what looked like an expanse, sparkling like ice, and awesome…. Above the expanse over their heads was what looked like a throne of sapphire, and high aboveon the throne was a figure like that of a man … and I heard the voice of one speaking. (Ezek. 1:4–28)

If this weren’t a passage from the revered Holy Bible but had just been discovered as a fragment of text from early times, an honest reading would certainly raise interesting questions.

And this is not the only biblical example. Elijah was taken up from the earth into the heavens, or sky, by a fiery chariot. He later appeared to three witnesses on what is called the Mount of Transfiguration (Matt. 17). Could this be a description of what we now call alien abduction? The story becomes more intriguing when we read of the solitary death of Moses. He walked up into the mountains following the command of a voice he heard speaking from out of the Ark of the Covenant. When he returned from the place where he communed with this voice, his face glowed as if from sunburn (like Richard Dreyfuss’s spaceship-radiation sunburn in Close Encounters of the Third Kind?). Then he disappeared. No one saw him again until he appeared with Elijah to talk to Jesus on the mountain. There the two of them stepped out of and were surrounded by a great light, with glowing raiment covering their bodies. Separated from its sacred context, this sounds just like an extraterrestrial encounter.

Religion is a universal phenomenon. Every culture on earth seems to have practiced some sort of religious tradition. Its very universality is often cited as evidence for its truth. UFO practitioners make the very same claim. The Mi’kMaq Indians of Maine can sometimes be persuaded to talk about the little people who come from outside the earth. If you can gain the trust of their elders, they might even show you where some of the little people are buried. The Mayans believed that star people regularly visited them and taught them the principles of the sacred geometry underpinning their magnificent temples. The Hopi believe their sacred katsina messengers came from the stars. Astrology seems to be the why behind archeological curiosities ranging from England’s Stonehenge to the Egyptian pyramids and from Canadian stone circles to Peruvian Inca temples. Indian tribes such as the Cherokee had legends similar to Celtic beliefs in fairies from the other side. Stars, other dimensions, visitations from outside—the legends, myths, beliefs, and stories are found in every culture and time.

Some religious believers say that God will bring about Armageddon before we destroy ourselves. Evil, they say, will be rooted out before we can end life as we know it. The UFO folks say it is aliens who are watching. They are observing our race and will keep us from destruction until we are mature enough to enter the cosmic community.

Atheists and agnostics smile and shake their heads at believers who accept religious ideas purely on faith. In response, the person of religious convictions can’t understand how the nonbeliever can be so thickheaded as to miss what is perfectly obvious to so many others. In the same way, the scientist compiles his or her facts and looks askance at those who are so naive as to take alien abduction stories as gospel. Meanwhile, the true believer in extraterrestrials journeys to Roswell, New Mexico, which he/she is convinced is the scene of the most infamous UFO coverup in United States history. There, fellow pilgrims agree that scientists are either hoodwinked by their education, blinded by their specialty, deceived by their government, or just plain out-and-out liars.

True believers in both religion and UFOs sometimes stand ready to die for their beliefs. Religious history abounds with stories of martyrs who gave their lives for what they were certain was true. When the time came for their personal Armageddon, they willingly obliged. In Waco, Texas, Branch Davidians perished in flame. In Guyana, followers of Rev. Jim Jones willingly swallowed FlaVor-Aid (a Kool-Aid knockoff) laced with cyanide. In the same way, there were those who believed that aliens were coming for them on the night of March 26, 1997. They thought an alien spaceship was following in the wake of the Hale-Bopp comet. Calmly and in an orderly fashion, they each drank a cocktail consisting of phenobarbital and vodka, believing that when they awoke they would have crossed through the portal they called Heaven’s Gate and entered the next level, where elevated aliens dwell (see Heaven’s Gate).

We do not know if aliens exist on other planets. We do not know if they have achieved a level of technology that would allow them to cruise the vast expanse of space/time. We do not know if they have found us, or traveled here to examine us. We do not know if their intentions toward us would be benevolent or not.

We don’t know if any of this is even possible, let alone true.

And we don’t know if it isn’t possible or true, either.

Like all matters of faith, belief in aliens and the possibility of an alien-induced Armageddon is a matter of individual choice.

Believe it or not. Sources:

Alschuler, William A. The Science of UFOs. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2001.

Red Star, Nancy. Star Ancestors: Indian Wisdomkeepers Share the Teachings of the Extraterrestrials.Rochester, VT: Destiny, 2000.

Willis, Jim. The Religion Book: Places, Peoples, Saints, and Seers. Detroit: Visible Ink Press, 2004.

ALPHA/OMEGA

In the final book of the Bible, God, speaking through Jesus Christ to John the Apostle, is purported to have said, It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega.

The New Testament was originally written in Greek. Alpha is the first letter of the Greek alphabet. Omega is the last. If written in English this sentence could be translated, I am the A and the Z. Another acceptable translation would be, I am the beginning and the end.

This statement implies a distinctly linear view of time, with a beginning and an end. Linear timelines are a distinct feature of monotheism (see Abraham and Monotheism; Adam and Eve), differing from other religious traditions that tend to think of time as circular or cyclical.

Until recently, linear thinking has also been a hallmark of Western science. Both time and space began at the Big Bang (see entry) and will end at the Big Crunch (see Big Crunch, Big Chill, and Big Rip). This outlook created fanciful science-fiction scenarios. Would it be possible to travel back in time and perhaps change the future? Such a scenario formed the central plotline of the Star Trek movies First Encounter and The Journey Home (see Hollywood Envisions THE END).

Of course the scientific theories prompted other questions: What came before the Big Bang? What will happen after the Big Crunch? The answers are not easily forthcoming. Usually it is explained that all evidence of what came before was destroyed at the moment of creation. Physicists can, utilizing sophisticated mathematics, explore back as far as the first second. But there is a point beyond which we simply cannot penetrate.

As for the end—well, who knows? The Big Crunch envisions the universe collapsing back into itself, perhaps to explode outward again, producing a new universe. Other theories visualize the cosmos as expanding forever, eventually becoming a dark, cold, lifeless place that has run out of energy.

Some physicists, however, have begun to question the whole linear approach to time (see Barbour, Julian). They ask if time is quite as simply defined as has usually been the case. Paraphrasing Albert Einstein, they say that the universe, including time, may be not only stranger than we have imagined, but stranger than we can imagine.

If this is the case, the whole concept of Alpha and Omega may have to be revisited.

Sources:

Campbell, Joseph. The Inner Reaches of Outer Space: Metaphor as Myth and as Religion. NewYork: Harper & Row, 1986.

Hawking, Stephen W. A Brief History of Time: From the Big Bang to Black Holes. New York: Bantam, 1988.

The Holy Bible, New International Version. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1978.

AMERICA IN PROPHECY

Because the United States of America is such a new country, there is no historical precedent for including it in classical prophecies concerning the endtimes. The biblcal Armageddon, after all, is set in the Middle East, with its rich historical tradition of wars and rumors of wars. Other cultures were concerned with their own futures, not the future of a country no one knew would ever exist.

Some Native Americans did have endtime traditions of their own, some of which even set dates. The year 2012, for example, is fast approaching. According to some interpreters, that is the year the Hopi, as well as the Mayans farther south, believe this world will end (see Indigenous Peoples of the Americas).

Coming from a very different direction, followers of Nostradamus claim that he foresaw events that would happen in America. It was just that he didn’t understand what he was seeing, so he couldn’t identify the location of some of his prophecies (see Nostradamus).

As far as the classical biblical prophets were concerned, however, America simply didn’t exist.

Or did it? Herbert W. Armstrong (see Armstrong, Herbert W.) claimed that the Bible does indeed predict the role America will play at the end of world history. He taught that in Genesis 49, Jacob, whose name had been changed to Israel, prophesied the future awaiting each of his twelve sons, who would become the twelve patriarchs of Israel. Armstrong believed that some of the descendants of these patriarchs eventually traveled west, becoming the ancestors of the nations of modern Europe:

The scepter will notdepart from Judah,

nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet,

until he comes to whom it belongs

and the obedience of the nations is his. (Gen. 49:10)

Why does England still follow an outdated monarchy in this modern world? According to Armstrong, it’s because the queen of England sits on the throne of David. Her descendants will continue to do so until Jesus Christ returns.

The story becomes even more complicated. Joseph, the eleventh son of Israel, who, following a long and tangled path, led his brothers to safety in Egypt, was described as a fruitful vine (Gen. 49:22). Joseph had two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh. Manasseh was the older and should have received the blessing appropriate for the firstborn. So when Joseph brought the boys to his father, Israel, he placed Manasseh on Israel’s right, to receive the right-hand patriarchal blessing, as was his due. But Israel, before delivering the blessing, crossed his hands, placing his right hand on the head of Ephraim. When Joseph objected, Israel prophesied that the younger son would, in effect, become the first nation.

Armstrong, stringing together many Old Testament texts, traced Ephraim and Manasseh to England. He believed Manasseh’s descendants became the founding fathers of the United States. Leaving England (the recipient of the firstborn blessing), they went over the wall, in Israel’s words, to America. Thus the prophecy was fulfilled. England (Ephraim) became the firstborn nation. Manasseh (the United States) became the younger son. Joseph indeed became a fruitful vine, fulfilling Israel’s prophecy:

With bitterness archers attacked him;

they shot at him with hostility.

But his bow remained steady,

his strong arm stayed limber,

because of the hand of the Mighty One of Jacob,

because of the Shepherd, the Rock of Israel,

because of your father’s God, who helps you because of the Almighty,

who blesses you with blessings of the heavens above,

blessings of the deep below,

blessings of the breast and womb…. Let all these rest on the head of Joseph, on the brow of the prince among his brothers. (Gen. 49:23–26)

To Armstrong, England and America, sprung from the loins of Joseph, beloved son of Israel and savior of the Jewish people, will continue to be world powers until the time of the end.

Most modern nations, to say the least, do not share this biblically mandated view of history. To many influential editors of foreign newspapers, including those in England, America has gone off the deep end when it comes to following the Bible. George Monbiot, in an article for the United Kingdom’s Guardian newspaper, writes:To understand what is happening in the Middle East, you must first understand what is happening in Texas. He goes on to say that President George W. Bush, whose home is in Texas, followed the lead of those who believe that the United States has a biblical mandate to side with Israel in the fight for Israel’s biblical lands.

The headline of Monbiot’s article spells it out:

Their Beliefs Are Bonkers, but They Are at the Heart of Power US Christian Fundamentalists Are Driving Bush’s Middle East Policy

As Monbiot describes it, The believers are convinced that they will soon be rewarded for their efforts. The antichrist is apparently walking among us, in the guise of Kofi Annan, Javier Solana, Yasser Arafat or, more plausibly, Silvio Berlusconi. The Wal-Mart Corporation is also a candidate … because it wants to radio-tag its stock, thereby exposing humankind to the Mark of the Beast.

Even if America is not specifically mentioned in prophetic tradition, it obviously plays an important role in world events. To those who believe that world history is approaching Armageddon, it follows that America will loom large as the drama unfolds. Hal Lindsey believes that America will be important, but not the leader, in those cataclysmic events. In The Late Great Planet Earth he writes:

The United States may be aligned with the Western forces headed by the ten-nation Revived Roman Empire of Europe. It is clear that the U.S. cannot be the leader of the West in the future. It is quite possible that Ezekiel was referring to the U.S. in part when he said: I will send fire—upon those who dwell securely in the coastlands….

The word translated coastlands or isle in the Hebrew is ai. It was used by the ancients in the sense of continents today. It designated great Gentile civilizations across the seas which were usually settled most densely along the coastlands. The idea here is that the Gentile nations of distant continents would all experience the impact of sudden torrents of fire raining down upon them. This can include prophetically the populated continents and islands of the Western Hemisphere as well as the Far East. It pictures cataclysmic events which will affect the whole inhabited earth.

Is this just another example of trying to fit current events into age-old prophecies? Can the old argument apply that prophets must be excused for their lack of specifics because they were viewing a future time that they could not really be expected to understand?

Apparently many people believe just that. In October 1998, police in Jerusalem reported that they were having difficulty with American Christian religious zealots who wanted to be in the Holy Land when the new millennium came to pass. Born-again Christians were moving into houses and apartments and filling motel rooms near the Mount of Olives so they would have a front-row seat for the Second Coming.

There is, however, another conservative religious view that suggests a different reason for America’s failure to be mentioned specifically in the Bible. Could it be that America is conspicuous by its absence because it is destined to fall into insignificance before Armageddon occurs? And since Armageddon seems to be just around the corner, is America’s downfall imminent?

This seems to be the position Edgar Cayce took (see Cayce, Edgar). He predicted various dire events that would begin in the 1950s and culminate by the year 2000. An earthquake would destroy large portions of Los Angeles and San Francisco. Floods would inundate the southern coast of California and the area between Salt Lake City and southern Nebraska. Land would appear off the East Coast and new lands would rise in the Caribbean.

Obviously these things didn’t happen, and the new millennium came in rather quietly. But Cayce’s followers remind us that calendars are, after all, human inventions. God may have a different date that doesn’t correspond to the one we have arbitrarily selected. A few years here or there is not a big difference.

Only time will tell.

Sources:

Bell, Art, and Brad Steiger. The Source: Journey through the Unexplained. New Orleans: Paper Chase Press, 1999.

Lindsey, Hal, with C. C. Carlson. The Late Great Planet Earth. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1970.

Monbiot, George. Their Beliefs Are Bonkers, but They Are at the Heart of Power. Guardian/UK, April 20, 2004. http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/views04/0420–03.htm.

The Holy Bible, New International Version. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1978.

AMERICAN INDIAN VIEWS OF THE ENDTIMES see Indigenous Peoples of the Americas

AMILLENNIALISM

(See also Millennialism; Pre-and Postmillennialism)

Millennialism is the belief, based on a literal interpretation of Revelation 20:1–10, that Jesus Christ will return to earth and reign for a thousand years, during which time Satan will be bound and unable to deceive the nations. This reign will be marked by peace and contentment.

But there are those who do not believe that a thousand years should be inter preted literally. These people are called amillennialists. Just as the number 40 appears all through the Bible (Noah’s flood, Israel’s time in the wilderness, Elijah’s journey into the desert, Jesus’ foray into the hills above the Dead Sea, etc.), the thou sand years figure is symbolic. There will be no literal millennium. That is a term meant to refer to the present day.

The Old Testament, say the amillennialists, describes the times that pointed to the coming of Jesus, the Messiah. Soon after Jesus rose from the dead, the temple, symbolizing the Old Covenant, was destroyed. Now we live in the time of the New Covenant—the New Testament. This is the time of the reign of Christ. The church, Christ’s body, is fulfilling the promises. When Christ returns, the Millennium, the age of the church, will be over and all believers will be ushered into the new heaven and new earth of Revelation 21.

Amillennialists believe that theirs is the primary interpretation and that it has been understood by the church from the beginning. Louis Berkhof, in his Systematic Theology, points out that although the term amillennialism has only been in use since the 1930s, the view to which it is applied is as old as Christianity.

Robert B. Strimple, a prominent amillennialist, writes: "As we read the New Testament, we come to understand that the Old Testament prophets spoke of the glories of the messianic age that was coming—that age inaugurated by Christ in which the church now lives—in terms of their own age and the religious blessings of God’s people in that old covenant age…. The true Israel is Christ. He is the suffering Servant of the Lord, this one who is—wonder of wonders—the Lord Himself!"

While premillennialists keep their eyes on modern Israel, waiting for the building of the third temple (see Temple at Jerusalem), which will mark the beginning of the end of this premillennial age, amillennialists believe that if the Jews ever do build such a temple, it will stand as a denial of the work of Jesus. Redemption has been accomplished. There is no longer any need for a temple. What it prefigured was fulfilled at Calvary and the cross of Jesus Christ. Thus, any new temple will be a satanic counterfeit. The true temple, according to Ephesians 2:19–22 and 1 Peter 2:5, is the church, the body of Jesus Christ.

Many Christians, of course, do not agree with this view. A literal interpretation of the Bible is the easiest way to go, they say. If the Bible says a thousand years, then that’s what it means. If this mixed-up, war-torn, strife-filled world is the best