Jump to content

Talk:End time/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Neutral countries in World War II, please double check your history

Whoops? In Europe, Portugal, Ireland, Sweden, and Switzerland were neutral during World War II. Spain would have been completely neutral had it not been for the division of troops it sent to help Hitler invade the USSR. I think Turkey was neutral for at least most of the war.Chris-marsh-usa (talk) 03:25, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

The American contemporary WWII documentary Prelude to War reports between 20 and 30 "United Nations" allied against Germany, Italy, and Japan, suggesting that in addition to countries that were battlegrounds, countries removed from the fighting, such as in the Western Hemisphere, sent contingents of troops.Chris-marsh-usa (talk) 01:36, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Catholics

Why is the Catholicism section not part of the Christianity bit? Dan Kerins 12:38, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Because Catholicism adds 'tradition' to its belief system, and the Vatican holds that tradition is equal with the inspiration of scripture. As an ex-catholic, I can see separating 'Catholicism' from the rest of the 'christianity' section as valid because there is simply too much tradition, false doctrine, etc. to dispute and discuss. I'd like to refer you to a book titled "A Woman Rides the Beast" (subtitled, "The Catholic Church in the Last Days" by Dave Hunt; ©1994; Harvest House Publishers. I hope you won't be offended by the knowledge contained in this book but, unfortunately, all of the investigation contained in this book is true. My family had worked for the catholic church and, to be opinionated, I didn't find the 'love of Christ' in any of them. Furthermore, when you read this book, then you'll see the details of the Inquisition; which thing neither Christ nor His apostles commanded christians to do, which was torture people. There is no question in my mind, and I agree with the Reformers, that the catholic church is the prophesied 'whore' mentioned in the book of Revelation. It's a hard thing to say to some catholics who have never investigated their church, but here is an ex-catholic saying these things. Catholicism, unfortunately, is the biggest christian cult on the Planet.--MurderWatcher1 21:02, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
I agree that Catholicism is a cult, however you can't say that in Wikipedia articles. We have to state what the major players believe. If most people have said throughout history that Catholicism is Christian, then it must be included as such. Any dispute about this would have to go in the relevant article, supported by reliable sources. rossnixon 01:25, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
That's why I put this ONLY on the discussion page. It's NOT in the actual Wikipedia article!--MurderWatcher1 14:31, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Wow, I think we should also include a "Baptist" and "Evengalical" section for the cult like aspects of these, while we're bringing personal feelings into wiki, cults who decimate families. These are the johny-come-latelys who seem to have a vastly different view on the 'end times'. In some cases they have invented whole new theory's and terms that have no scripture to back them up. So can we please also list their zany and crazy stances on end times separate from the true and original Christians? I mean how many times in recent history have these cult-like Christian sects (baptist and evangelical) predicted that the end times have been upon us and upon us? —Preceding unsigned comment added by210.1.223.204 (talk) 05:43, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Just thought I'd re-touch on this. You fundamentalist american christians really shouldn't brandish around comments such as "We have to state what the major players believe". It is not a belief, it is a fact. Catholicism is the original Christianity, your cult sub-section is a johny come lately. I know you guys like to just make things up and totally ignore anything remotely fact based (Intelligent design? lololol) but hey, come on.. 210.1.223.204 (talk) 12:43, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Cults

When I had cult education in Baptist church, they told us that cults often would do one or more of the following:

  • Add to the Bible or even replace it with some sacred writings versus the Bible alone (the Mormons have the Book of Mormon)
  • Multiply the requirements for salvation (usually an emphasis on doing things rather than believing in Jesus enough to be ready to do something if called). Recall the thief on the cross had nothing but his faith at the very end of his life, and could do nothing for Jesus.
  • Subtracting from the deity of Jesus and/or the Father by suggesting that a mortal man may become or is God or that Jesus is a mere man. The Jehovah's Witnesses have a publication, Jesus, the Greatest MAN Who Ever Lived.
  • Dividing a convert from his or her pre-existing social contacts, family, friends, etc., in an attempt to re-socialize him/her in a total institution environment.Chris-marsh-usa (talk) 01:45, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a pulpit

The "Dispensationalist prophecies" segment appears to be little short of a several-page Chick Tract. It consists largely of incredibly POV assertions and laughable "evidence" to support the dispensationalist doctrine, such as the following assertion:

"Just before tribulation, people will describe the world situation as 'peace and safety'. This is exactly the situation we are seeing the beginnings of right now, after the end of the Cold War."

I'm amazed that even the most hardened evangelical would type those words. The world situation right now is PEACE and SAFETY? Are you typing this with a straight face? Is this a prank?

"Another sign that the Second Coming might occur soon is a chronological pattern in the Bible. According to the Bible, the creation of the earth and humanity began about 6,000 years ago, or 4,000BC. God revealed himself to Abraham, the ancestor of the Jews, around 4,000 years ago, or 2,000BC. The birth, life,and death of Jesus Christ occurred 2,000 years later. We are now living 2,000 years after that event. So it makes sense that the next and last big event in Bible, the Second Coming, will occur very soon, or around 2000AD."

Amazing. Not only is this original research, but the person who typed this is quite possibly one of the only people on the planet who believes his particular brand of numerological ramblings. I'm starting to think Wikipedia needs better leadership to keep out the wackos. Xezlec23:20, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Partially fixed it. Let's see if it gets reverted. Xezlec 23:24, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I had started editing some of this page. As a Dispensationalist, I do believe in scholarly and factual reporting. I came to this belief because it is reasonable and intelligent. There are a considerable number of well-researched books by Dispensationalists, and I have put some of those in the book section. I hope you will have a chance to read these, and please don't think we all get our beliefs from Chick tracts!--MurderWatcher1 14:39, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

older entries

This article is representative of sweeping totalistic claims unsupported by fact or evidence typical of many of Wikipedia articles. There is no survey cited here that reviewed various demonimations' views toward end times. The article lacks even an informed understanding of the diverse governing structures of various denominations. At least one major denomination accepts most of the end-times belief systems suggested in the article.

But the article states: No major denomination apart from the Jehovah's Witnesses accepts these beliefs as a standard of Biblical interpretation.

Some major denominations do not impose central authority on local churches. Southern Baptists, for example, are the dominant religion in most of the American South. But once a Southern Baptist minister is ordained, the denomination makes no other dictates about his doctrinal teachings. There is hardly a mechahnism for central authority over the theology of local Baptist churches. The denomination is organized as a "convention" of independent local churches. Local churches hire ministers whom they believe teach doctrines appropriate to the beliefs of their congregation. The independent Southern Baptist churches have developed doctrines so diverse, the diversity has created deep divisions in the Southern Baptist Convention.

Southern Baptist theologians debate diverse views of the end times, including premillenialism, postmillenialism and forms of preterism. Preterism, then, is not "unlike all the other Christian theological systems;" it is a doctrine accepted or suggested in many local churches asamillenialism.

Here is a link to a page detailing a debate among Southern Baptist theological professors regarding diverse views of the end times which this article says are rejected by major denominations such as the Southern Baptists:

http://www.sbts.edu/news/NewsRead.php?term=Fall2002&article=NR032

The Southern Baptist panel discussion asked "do Christians know what they believe? Can Christians make a clear biblical argument in defense of their position? And can they make that argument while acting in a gracious and gentle manner to those whom may disagree?"

In brief:

Three Southern Baptist Theological Seminary professors did just that recently, presenting different positions on what theologians call eschatological doctrine (or end-times theology).

Daniel Akin presented a progressive dispensational (pretribulation, premillenial) position. Chad Brand defended a posttribulation, premillenial position, and Hal Ostrander presented an amillenial position.

Bird 06:16, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Nonsense edits by 69.167.97.221 reverted to most recent sensible collaborative version. --Quadalpha 22:20, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Merge with Last Judgment?

I have removed a label proposing that this article should be merged with Last Judgment. The Last Judgment is a specific event in Christian eschatology proposed in the Book of Revelations, and in some form or another is accepted by most Christians.

The end times are a genre of prophecies for the most part proposed by the specific belief system of "premillenialdispensationalists", and as such involve a specific set of Biblical interpretations that not all Christians accept, but which involve attempts to relate apocalyptic prophecies from Revelation, Ezekiel, and Daniel to current events. These prophecies include non-Scriptural specifics such as the attempt to identify the Antichrist, the role of the European community and the state of Israel in Biblical prophecy, and other things that do not relate to the Last Judgment. -- Smerdis of Tlön 14:22, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Jehovah's Witnesses don't think that end times or "time of end" ("last days", NW) and "Last Judgement"(Har-Maggedon or Jehovah's day) are the same. This article should NOT be merged with Last Judgement. But they think that end times or "time of end" ("last days") and "end of the world" ("the conclusion of the system of things", NW) are the same. Rantaro

NPOV

This article reads as if it is written from a selected set of Christian views, rather than the whole range. CheeseDreams 20:33, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It would help if you pointed out what those views were. I've tried to make it clear that this article is chiefly about End Times beliefs and prophecies that circulate among U.S. fundamentalists, and attempts to describe those beliefs. Christian eschatology is about the doctrine of the last things generally in Christianity. Smerdis of Tlön 20:48, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The end times are, in one version of Christian eschatology, a time of tribulation that will precede the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.

The first sentance the article explains this is not a cover-all-Christian viewpoint. That said, might help if it explained a bit cleary which version we are talking about (US?Baptist?Fundamentalist?). It doesn't need the NPOV tag though.--ZayZayEM 12:10, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Just because the article makes clear what its purpose is, doesn't mean that the article is NPOV. "End times" is clearly an end-of-the-world concept, but I see nothing here about non-Christian ends of the world, like the Norse Ragnarok. Are there similar concepts in Chinese, Greek, Egyptian, Roman, Japanese, Maori, or other cultures? One would not know from this article. The phrase "end times" may be, in English, most associated with Christianity (maybe even just U.S. fundamentalism), but can anyone say this authoritatively enough to justify the complete absence of any other scenarios? I think that's the issue here. Certainly the current article is robust enough to deserve to be a separate article, but perhaps it should be titled "End times in Christian fundamentalism" and be referenced in a more general overall article. — Jeff Q 20:09, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Because, while Ragnarok deals with an "End Times" scenario, it is not THE "End Times". In terms of cultural sensitivity, the correct term (Ragnarok) should be used rather than lumping into some anglo-cover-all-term — especially when the more appropriate terminology iseschatology. Perhaps a tag at the front of the article, explaining the term is more appropriately used for anglo-christi-judeo version of evvents, but many more cultural versions can be found in eschatology (where they belong).--ZayZayEM 01:51, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Perhaps what you're looking for is our article on the end of the world, which is perhaps the broadest term in English, and quite properly covers Ragnarök, the Hindu ends of the eras, the Mayan epoch that's due sometime in the next ten years, the sun going nova, and all the various other scenarios including the big crush, or the heat-death of the universe. That article already exists, though it could stand improvement. All of these beliefs should quite properly be added to that page. "End times" as far as I know always refers to the Christian belief that current events mean that the Rapture and Second Coming are imminent. Smerdis of Tlön 02:37, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
If this article is about Fundamentalist views then it should clearly state so in the title. It should be End times (Fundamentalist U.S. Christian views).CheeseDreams 19:55, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Right, its been moved. DO NOT move it back until it contains views
  • Fundamentalist Christians not in the U.S.
  • Christians who are not Fundamentalist
Many of the above consider "End Times" to refer to something specific.
CheeseDreams 20:01, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Title

Should this be more appropriately End Times (currently a REDIRECT). Both words should capitalised, no?--ZayZayEM 02:01, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The canonical way is to use lower case. More appears to link to End times than to End Times in any case. It isn't really a proper noun. -- Smerdis of Tlön 14:51, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Moved without discussion

Why? -- Smerdis of Tlön 20:09, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I have undone the move. Everything linked to End times or End Times in any case, so the move really achieved nothing. It was not done right even if there's an argument for moving the page; the new page title contained punctuation and was virtually unsearchable. These beliefs, though most prominent in the USA, did not originate there and are not exclusively American, so the new page title was misleading. --Smerdis of Tlön 14:49, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Efforts to bring about end times

Should this be mentioned here or elsewhere? c.f here --ZayZayEM01:43, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

There is a bit about that in the article itself: "The implications of the prophecies that turmoil in the Middle East is inescapable, that nuclear war is predestined by Scripture, and that it will supernaturally lead to a divine utopia, give rise to some misgivings among unbelievers in the prophecies." I'm not sure how much farther we can go with this without straying into seriously POV territory. -- Smerdis of Tlön02:59, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The statement: "The fact that in the early 1970s, there were seven nations in the European Economic Community was held to be significant; this aligned the Community with a seven headed dragon in Revelations." is incorrect. The original EEC had six members (Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and West Germany). This was increased to nine by the additions of Denmark, Great Britain and Ireland in 1973. There never exixted a seven member EEC, and so, cannot be associated with the 'seven headed dragon'. EFTA has seven members, but that doesn't exist anymore.

In the new Fox series Point Plesent, the main character who is the devil's daughter has the sign in her eye. It is all three sixes combined into one symbol.

NOTE: I removed the 2 leading spaces in the above line, but make NO judgement whether it is vandalism in the first place. --Bill W. Smith, Jr. 20:28, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Watt quote

Added James Watt's quote "after the last tree is felled, Christ will come back." to the end of the prophecies section. 666 is the mark of the beast.

not Watt quote

NOTE: Internet rumors. James Watt asserts that he never made this statement and the source is questionable. It was published in "Grist", picked up by Bill Moyers, and made a national splash. Moyers has since noted that there is no clear record that Watt ever said this in public. Please do your own research. You can start here. http://www.hillnews.com/thehill/export/TheHill/Comment/ByronYork/021005.html

By the way, I am pro-Moyers, anti-Watt.

The source may be a questionable person, but it is not unknown. So "and no source can identify a contemporaneous historical document establishing the quote" should be removed. It originated on page 229 of a book called "Setting the Captives Free", by Austin Miles, and was published in 1990. I'm going to go ahead and change it. Note: This reference also appears in the article on Watt himself.
Yikes! A secondary encyclopedia entry is no place to air a dispute over a quote. If we mention the quote at all, it should be cited over to the Wiki page on Watt, where folks who specialize in Watt-mania can hash it out, but it should not divert readers from the main point, which is aleady made in the text. At the very least we need to discuss the quote here on the discussion page before we agree on the wording that is NPOV and also fair to Watt (and I am also anti-Watt). Could folks here please sign their posts and use the indent format?--Cberlet 15:49, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Neon genesis? End Times or just End-of-the-World

Yes, Neon Genesis Evangelion has a lot of pseudo-Chrsitian motifs, but it takes it's philosophy stuff from just about every source conceivable as well.

I just don't think this peculiar branch of eschatology is the place to mention it. In particular NGE does not deal with the return of Jesus, an anti-Christ or end-times plagues--ZayZayEM 04:37, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Love NGE. Have the whole series on VHS. It is clearly apocalyptic, and perhaps millenarian, but fits End-of-the-World better than the End Times due to the specific Christian references to the End Times. I know...the series features Angels and Evangelion is a pun...but still--Cberlet 04:53, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

1000 AD

hey, noob here

I don't know if it was mentioned, I couldn't see it there but I was only scanning through the article, that many Christians alive at the end of the first millenium A.D. were highly expecting Jesus to return around 1000 A.D. (because of all the emphasis on "1000 years" in the bible), and it was a blow to their faith when he did not return. This is referenced from Geoffery Blainey's "A very short history of the world."

It might be mentioned elsewhere on this site... but it's the kind of knowledge I think you need to know when dealing with a subject like this, since many people reading it are probably half-paranoid delusional internet nuts, and not historians or researchers.

I'd edit it myself but I'm not very interested in this subject and I can't write... good.


CHOW! 09:08, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Rastafari

One way of improving this article has been to add bits about the Rastafarian religion, which firmly believes these are the end times. This article has had too much of a Christian POV for me, and I have tried to remedy this by adding the Rasta material. I am surprised that it got to be article of the week without even a mention of the Rastas, as if only Christian groups believed in the end times. --SqueakBox 19:10, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)

Jehovah's Witness Edits

I'm reinserting the changes you removed, with possible qualms about one. I'm getting sick and tired of you running around removing any edits anywhere that don't cast Jehovah's Witnesses in the light you want, especially given your clear lack of knowledge of their beliefs (or at least public feigning of lack of knowledge). I'm not gonna keep doing hours of research to please you either when you don't (at least publicly) know what they believe, so you're gonna have to research stuff on your own.

Regarding the change involving 1914, it is indeed just a claim made by them. For one, it is impossible to calculate any date from the Bible itself, because the Bible has no dates. They claim to obtain 1914 based on the date of Jerusalem's destruction by the Babylonians. Unfortunately for them, that happened in 587 BC, not 607 BC as they claim. Without 607, it is impossible to arrive at 1914 in the way in which they do. You have to then resort to rewriting history to place biblical events wherever it's convenient for you, which is what they do. Beyond that, for Wikipedia to state that such a date can in fact be (meaningfully) calculated from the Bible is equivalent to an endorsement of the correctness of those calculations. Stating that they claim to calculate 1914 from the Bible is sufficient, and all that Wikipedia should say, especially since not a single other Bible-believing group (that I know of) agrees with them. There are enough numbers in the Bible that you could probably 'calculate' anyone's birthdate from it; that does not, however, mean that you can truly calculate anyone you want's birthdate from the Bible, it means that you can screw around with a lot of numbers until you end up with a convenient one eventually somehow, especially if you're allowed to use provably-incorrect numbers and any interpretation of anything that you want to. The same goes with most other doctrines. This also raises the issue of when something stops being a claim and becomes a fact. If I claim to be able to calculate the winning lottery numbers from the pattern of the paint on my wall, is that considered any more than a claim? Especially if I'm wrong, and even change my story after the drawing? All you could say is that I claimed to calculate them, not that I did in fact calculate them. In their publications, they are free to state that 1914 is definitely a biblical number (or whatever else they want to claim about anything else), but Wikipedia isn't one of their publications.

Regarding the 537 one, I inserted the words "they believe" because, as far as I remember off the top of my head, the Bible doesn't say anything that would require the Jews to have returned in 537 instead of 538. They were released during Cyrus' first year according to the Bible, which was early 538-early 537, so it was mostly 538 anyway. That doesn't say when they returned, but, barring another verse clarifying the issue, they could have returned as early as 538. If there's a verse that says they returned during his second year, which was 537-536, that doesn't necessarily mean that they didn't return in 536 either, unless a statement of the month of their return eliminates that possibility. But this is the one that I mentioned above that I had qualms about. If you can show that the Bible does in fact demand that they returned in 537 and only 537, then feel free to revert this change.

Regarding the UN change, you're just plain wrong. Research it.

As I said, I'm getting tired of someone who either doesn't know or pretends to not know their beliefs very well reverting any correct changes I make that are less than flattering to Jehovah's Witnesses. I'm fixing to just start reinstating any changes that I know for a fact to be correct and letting anyone who doesn't believe them do the research themselves since I don't have infinite time to do research to convince everyone in explicit detail of every little two-word change I make anywhere that involves Jehovah's Witnesses.66.158.232.37 05:02, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

I would like to point out also the unknown certainty of the date you provided of 587 BC. Many historians will agree that Babylonian captivity of the Jews lasted 70 years, which was acknowledged in the Bible by the prophet Daniel. The year 587 is derived from the Canon of Ptolemy, which has neither been disproven nor substantiated, and even has its share of criticism. Many historical records peg 537-539 as the year of the overthrow of Babylon by Cyrus (which you acknowledge yourself), so unfortunately for you and your self-reliable "studies", 587 does not fall inline with the "70 years" of captivity. So the exact dates are not known, but it shouldn't be so difficult to see where the year 607 was derived. And considering they believe the Bible to be infallible, it's obvious they would use the 70 years of captivity to calculate the date of Jerusalem's destruction.--Bighairycamel (talk) 21:42, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

How about "According to Mormonism"?

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has a lot of additional scripture, prophesies from Joseph Smith, etc, that pertain to the end times. Would be nice to have a section here with a summary of this information, I think. Wadsworth 16:11, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Are there sources for the specific Latter-Day Saints material? I've seen some Mormon texts that seem to show a great deal of dispensationalist influence, and am not sure how much currency they have. Our article Prophecies of Joseph Smith is also unhelpful in this regard.Smerdis of Tlön 17:23, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
The easiest way to locate the "offical" doctrine of the LDS Church is in their scriptures. Specifically, the Joesph Smith translation of Matthew chapter 24 (found here [[1]]), etc. Here is an older article I just found:[[2]]. There are more references. A peek into the Topical Guide, under "Last Days", gives this list: [3]. At the top of the list is Old Testament references, followed by New Testament, followed by (and this is where it get's into specific LDS doctrine) Book of Mormon references (starting with "1 Ne. 14:17"), followed by Doctrine and Covenants (abbreviated D&C) which are mostly revelations from Joseph Smith, many of them referring to the last days. See for example D&C 45 ([[4]]). At the very end of the list are a few references from the Pearl of Great Price (a small book of scripture containing some misc. tidbits from Joseph Smith). Here's another list, under End of the World: [[5]]. Hope this helps. If I had some time, I'd try my hand at writing it myself... Wadsworth 21:46, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
The more I read this stuff, the more I suspect that someone with a better understanding of LDS basic beliefs ought to write this. I find myself having unanswered questions just looking at the LDS articles here. Do Mormons believe in a physical second coming of Jesus Christ? or do they believe that those prophecies have been fulfilled, either in Jesus' appearance in the New World, the (re)founding of the LDS church, or some other way? How do received ideas about the Second Coming, the Last Judgment, and a "new heaven and a new earth" jive with Mormon doctrines about the eventual deification of certain of their followers and the former mortal personhood of God the Father? We seem not to have a basic article onMormon eschatology or Latter Day Saints eschatology, or for that matter on Latter Day Saints beliefs about Jesus.
I get the idea that Mormon belief in the End Times is the result of shared cultural and political influences with End Times believers. I suspect also that the more Mormons are committed to their church's own distinctive teachings, the more likely they are to realize that there is a deep inconsistency between LDS and dispensationalist doctrinal assumptions. I'd like to know how prevalent end times prophecy beliefs are among Mormons, but I suspect any attempt to find out would lead down the path of original research. Smerdis of Tlön 05:28, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
The Jade Knight pointed me to the site http://ldslastdays.com/ which was most helpful. I have written a couple paragraphs in the article based chiefly on the information provided at that site. This may yet benefit from broader perspectives. Smerdis of Tlön 15:11, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I've tried to add in some distinct cultural beliefs and correct doctrinal issues. There are obviosuly a great deal of similarities, but did not include all of them. More work needs to be done. For example, Mormons are counselled to have a year supply of food. Culturally, the second coming has much to do with this. More needs to be done. -Visorstuff 17:18, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Wonderful entry! Thank you so much. I'll keep an eye on it, and when I come across more material that fits, I'll see if I can't add it in. Again, many thanks. Wadsworth 20:30, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Obviously being 3 years late for this conversation doesn't make much of a difference. However, I've read this portion of the "end of time" article, and found it to have many innacuracies. Also of worth note, doing research on non-LDS websites, will usually not provide you with accurate information to base your articles on. Try LDS.org, or Mormon.com...the only two LDS websites. Or...even simpler than that, call a missionary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Infero Veritas (talk •contribs) 20:05, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Happy to conede I might be wrong in a few cases, but for the most part these drag the article down rather than enhancing it. - Just zis  Guy, you know? [T]/[C] AfD? 12:29, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

I just want to note that NONE OF THESE constitues a reliable source per WP:VERIFY and hence should not be used. Peter G Werner (talk) 06:10, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Seventh-day Adventists?

I am surprised that this article makes no mentions of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, which is rather well known for its belief in an End time judgment (investigative judgment) and has promoted a imminent Second Coming. The church is also a direct result of the Millerite movement. The Adventist church is also three times the size of the Jehovah's Witnesses which have a whole subsection devoted to their views on the End Times.MyNameIsNotBob 09:37, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

"End Times" - origin of the English phrase?

To the non-North American ear the phrase "End Times" sounds strange. Indeed it's often referenced in speech marks. Anyone know where and when the English phrase originates? More familiar in many parts of the English-speaking world would be Doomsday, possibly Armageddon, or just The End of the World. There is also eschatology. "End Times" seems relatively recent, and relatively North American. For example do Muslims refer to the "End Times", as the article suggests. Or is just North American Christians / some Western Christians.

Hakluyt bean 13:22, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Article merger?

Christian views are the most dominant. For these, the hierarchy seems to be: Eschatology, then more specifically End times which describes eschatology for the Abrahamic religions specifically it appears, and then Christian eschatology. However the articles do not exhibit this hierarchy clearly, and there is much overlap. Ironically, this article contains numerous non-Abrahamic religions. What would you think of amerger with "End times" into "Eschatology"? Else, can someone justify that the very colloquial-sounding phrase "end times" does refer specifically to the Abrahamic religions? The article itself admits that many other religions hold to comparable beliefs. Colin MacLaurin 16:23, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

In the March 17, 2004 version when it was displayed on the main page as a featured article, it corresponded with the tribulation, a sub-topic of Christian eschatology. This is clearly very different from its current state! Could someone find out when it lost its featured status? Colin MacLaurin 16:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

End Times - something of a Minority Report?

It's good to see wikipedia treat a subject on its own merits, not that of its critics, however the impression I get from the article is that although"End times beliefs in Christianity vary widely" both the phrase and philosophy are rather mainstream. That's not the case is it? For example I find this on the BBC: "Much of the writing and teaching about the end times is apocalyptic, frightening and threatening, and it's important to remember that many mainstream churches do not believe that these teachings should be taken literally". Maybe this is a UK perspective, but then the article might reflect that (?)

Hakluyt bean 13:34, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


List of doomsday scenarios

Could use votes to save this article, thanks MapleTree 22:24, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup Tag

The subject of the article is good, but the style needs a lot of work. In particular, it violates NPOV, and not just in the section describing (in perhaps un-necessary detail) Rapture theology. The tone of the article is inconsistent as a result: the beliefs of different religions are all given partiality. That is not NPOV. It is merely a lot of POVs next to each other. Michaelbusch 05:50, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

What this article needs, chiefly, is refocusing. It began its life (and was once a featured article) when it was focused on the belief among certain Christians, mostly North American Protestant dispensationalists, that the Second Coming was imminent: the various signs in current events or trends could be mustered in support of this belief, and the future scenarios projected by this belief system. Since then, it's become a scattershot collection of me-toos and discusses the eschatologies of dozens of denominations. I suspect that a lot of the latter should be sent to different articles, so that the original subject could be presented more consistently and in greater detail than it is now. - Smerdis of Tlön20:55, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


I tried to add something...

I recently added a section to this article on Pastafarianism, the worship of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Yet it was deleted. Could someone explain why? 68.221.31.37 21:10, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

You're kidding, right? Do you seriously believe that this should be included at all! 'Gimme a break!' Serious 'stuff' here, please!--MurderWatcher1 16:39, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Proposed revert of article

This article was once a featured article but most recent additions seem to be entirely unreferenced. Most of the article now does not cite any sources.

I propose some drastic action: how about we revert the article to where it was when it was a featured article with anything that is in the article now that is adequately referenced merged in?

I suggest a one month time out before doing this to allow more discussion and references to be added.

Thanks and regards Bksimonb 06:58, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm. On second thoughts the "featured article" version isn't exactly brimming with references. It still seems to be largely OR. This might be more work than I first thought... Bksimonb 06:42, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Dispensationalism

I came across this page as a Wikipedia link and I decided initially to add some edits to it. I feel that the Dispensational school of thought is not properly represented. I added at least one cite ref to John F. Walvoord and some other works. This whole page, however, needs a lot of work. You might find my Wikipedia handle name a little strange but when you click on my page and see my book list, then you'll begin to understand where I'm coming from. I hope that I can improve on this article with time.--MurderWatcher1 16:11, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

The Other Faith Traditions Section

Can anyone provide dates for the faiths, specifically the Hindu and other beliefs mentioned in this sub-section? I can't find any using the Wikipedia links. I feel that the Other Faiths Traditions section should list all of these religions chronologically. This way, all readers of this page could see a progression in 'faith-thought'.--MurderWatcher1 19:05, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Current Times section

The Current Times section sounds as if a preacher wrote it - would anyone be willing to neutralize the Christian content, add in some references to other faiths (such as Islam, as that might give people an understanding of their interpretation of, say, the Iraq war), and incorporate it better into the article?

Somehow I just can't read this as neutral.

"In the past 10 years, news programs have been filled with news of crooked politicians, greedy companies (Enron), murders, and ungodly behavior. With new media like the internet, self pleasure websites like pornography have dramatically increased"


Bob19191 (talk) 15:57, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Family Radio not mentioned?

I wonder why is Harold Camping not mentioned? I would say that his teachings deserve a mention, due to their publicity through Family Radio. —Preceding unsigned comment added by81.201.48.25 (talk) 13:31, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Small mistake

2.5.3 Maya Great cycle ends on the 21 (or 23) December 2012 not 12. Suslik666 (talk) 23:14, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Just in case anyone wonders about the last link edit, I just updated the external link to the "Last Trumpet: Post-Trib Research Center" to reflect its recent site name and URL change. The site is now called "Answers in Revelation". Phoenix1861 (talk) 18:22, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Sikhism

Hi guys! well I was reading some things about the end times in Sikhism, do you think that It can be added to the article? Id be most willing to write it out.

If yes, then we may want to consider the raaj namah and karni namah the story of the jandh tree the "RAJ KAREGA KHALSA" line Kalki avtar in sikhism Mehdi Imam in sikhism and of course other things as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added byGursikhzuber (talk • contribs) 08:48, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

I say do it! Chris-marsh-usa (talk) 03:32, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Future-events template

Someone added a future-events template to the top of this article. I removed it, but in case of objections, I want to explain exactly why. What Wikipedia is not states:

"Articles that present extrapolation, speculation, and 'future history' are original research and therefore inappropriate. While scientific and cultural norms continually evolve, we must wait for this evolution to happen, rather than try to predict it. Of course, we do and should have articles about notable artistic works, essays, or credible research that embody predictions."

This article exists under the reasoning in that third sentence. The end-time is a significant belief in major religions, and the article describes those beliefs, as it should. To treat it as a real and impending event, however, violates the passage above and the neutral point of viewpolicy; not even most adherents of the relevant religions necessarily believe that the end-time is imminent. A. Parrot (talk) 20:18, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Dubious section on Hopi beliefs

I want to note that the entire section on Hopi "end times" beliefs is unsourced or sourced to dubious, wholly unreliable "new age" sources about "The Hopi Prophecy" that do not remotely meet the standards of WP:VERIFY. Several purported Hopi sayings are sourced to the movieKoyaanisqatsi which, at best, takes significant artistic liberties with Hopi source materials. Based on this, I have serious doubts that much of what is stated is an accurate reflection of Hopi beliefs.

This is not to say that there is not an mythology among the Hopi about what might be called "end times". Probably the best source on the topic is the book The invention of prophecy: continuity and meaning in Hopi Indian religion by Armin Geertz. This book makes it clear that prophetic ideas among the Hopi are an ongoing tradition and that the most quoted prophecies (such as those referred to, in a significantly altered form, in Koyaanisqatsi) date back to the 1970s, notably in a letter to President Nixon drafted by Thomas Banyacya in 1970. This is not to say that such prophecies are "inauthentic" for being modern – the Hopi are a living cultural tradition, after all – but rather, it should not be implied that they are somehow remarkably precient ancient prophecies, but rather, like much "prophecy", thorougly contemporary interpretations of older mythologies. Peter G Werner (talk) 06:35, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

It looks like the section on Maya beliefs contains much patent nonsense sourced from new age "2012" sources. The entire section on Native American beliefs needs to be rewritten based on reliable sources. Peter G Werner (talk) 06:57, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

BKWSU: Biased section on minor group

This section was previously removed by User:JonHarder on the grounds that it gives "undue weight to a minor group"[6]. It has been subsequently re-inserted by an indef blocked editor with a strong emotional connection to the group involved. Also, in it's present form the section portrays the group in a deliberately unflattering way although it does use reliable sources to do so.

Since it does use reliable sources, and I have a COI issue with the group involved (as disclosed on my user page), and this editor is in dispute with me, I am inviting input for uninvolved editors to establish,

  1. If the section belongs in the article at all
  2. If and how it can be reworded in a more balanced and neutral way
  3. Whatever is decided would other editors be willing to monitor the page an re-enforce the consensus should there be any further attempts to re-insert or change it by re-incarnations of the same indef blocked editor. I am something of a target myself so it would be better if the community at large could enforce this than me try to do it.

Thanks & regards Bksimonb (talk) 12:56, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Brahma Kumari adherent BK Simon B fails to mention that "This section was previously removed by User:JonHarder" ... after lobbying byBksimonb as part of a great attempt by Brahma Kumari cult members to control topics about their new religious movement.
It was identical to removals previously carried out by BK Simon B, e.g. [[7]]
For more details on MO, see [[8]]. --Same as 5000 years ago (talk) 15:28, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
The reason I made an edit and JohHarder made his edit were different and spaced by over two years. I can't see any previous discussion I had with Jon Harder. Bksimonb (talk) 08:11, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Changes to BKWSU entry

Following from a conversation I had with Maunus [9] on his talk page, I would like to propose the following changes to the paragraph on the BKWSU. I will wait for one week for comments and suggestions from legitimate editors.

  • "Whereas in Hinduism, the length of the Cycle of Time, or "Kalpa", is 100,000s of years". This contradicts the statement earlier in the article under the "Hinduism" heading, "he Cycle or "Kalpa", lasting 8.64 billion years in the terms of orthodox Hindus".

I found a source, "Themes and Issues in Hinduism" by Paul Bowen ISBN-13: 978-0304338511, page 123 that makes a more precise comparison, "Thus the Brahma Kumari world time of four yugas lasts only 5000 years, by contrast with the 4,320,000 of the puranic accounts". I suggest changing the first sentence to, "Whereas in puranic accounts, the length of the Cycle of Time, or "Kalpa", is 4,320,000s of years". Still not the same as the earlier paragraph but it is now "orthodox Hindus" vs "puranic accounts" which indicates that there may be different lengths given within Hunduism as a whole. Though I'm not an expert in this. An alternative may be just to delete the contrast entirely and just state that the BKWSU believe the cycle to be 5000 years, and leave it at that.


  • "Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi states the Brahma Kumaris' prediction of the imminent 'End of the World', or Destruction as it is called, is generally hidden from non-members [22] but that the Brahma Kumaris claim that before it, everyone on earth must come to know their God and purify themselves". Certainly Beit-Hallahmi talks about the end of the world being hidden from non-members in the reference quoted but I was unable to find any mention of the "claim that before it, everyone on earth...". Since he doesn't talk on the second half of the sentence the word "but" is inserted bias. Also "claim" is a word to avoid. I suggest breaking it into two sentence to make it more neutral. The second half of the sentence is based on the next reference from from lifepositive.com [10]. Here is the proposed two sentences.
Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi states the Brahma Kumaris' prediction of the imminent 'End of the World', or Destruction as it is called, is generally hidden from non-members [22]. Before destruction everyone on earth must come to know their God and purify themselves.


  • "Failed predictions of the End of the World[24] which had been removed from the teachings and hidden from those that came later on." This sentence is referencing through a reliable source, "Wallis", who is himself quoting an unreliable self-validating source, a splinter group of the BKWSU known as Adhyatmik Ishwariya Vishwa Vidyalaya. Since Wallis himself, nor any other reliable source, is making such as claim I suggest it is deleted.

Regards Bksimonb (talk) 12:50, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

The problem is Simon, you are not a legitimate editor. Your motives are obvious to everyone.
* You are neither being entirely honest nor playing by the rules. Walliss is the reliable source. Your religious organization is not.--Time served (talk) 05:01, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Walliss is not actually making the claim that was being used to source the statement of fact in question. I still have editing rights and these are not currently being challenged. I am not proposing the use of any primary source here. Bksimonb (talk) 15:44, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

End of Days recorded in the Tanakh:

In this section the writings are from the KJV instead of the JPS. If we're going to talk about the Judaic perspective perhaps we should actually quote the Judaic writings. —Preceding unsigned comment added byReddfox321 (talk • contribs) 00:18, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Go ahead. şṗøʀĸşṗøʀĸ: τᴀʟĸ 11:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)


Various problems in intro

"The End Time, End Times, or End of Days are the eschatological writings in the three Abrahamic religions" Huh? No, the End Times are described in eschatological writings; the writings themselves are not the End Times!

It's also not wholly accurate to say that Jesus will "usher in the Kingdom of God" as if this represents an universal Christian view of what the Kingdom of God means - 'perfect' would be more appropriate; in Catholic and many other Christian groups' theology, Christ will complete orperfect the Kingdom of God at the end of time, but he has already instituted it -- "the kingdom of God is within you", etc.128.194.250.125 (talk) 11:11, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

No references in the Sunni Islam sub-section

I noticed that no sources were specified for this part of the article: End_Time#Sunni_Islam . Specifically, there is a huge list of "minor signs" and no clue as to where was it taken from. Given that it's currently the biggest list in the article and that some of its items do not seem like something written more than a thousand years ago, I'd say that citations are even more needed. Regards.78.83.71.117 (talk) 10:36, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

I was not able to find any references for the "Minor signs" list. I would suggest removing it for now. Kaldari (talk) 22:15, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Removing Islamic salutations

Let's collectively decide that Islamic salutations ('salah') to the prophet Mohammed are inappropriate. Repeating these incantations when the name of the prophet is spoken is superstitious, religiously motivated, adds no information, and has no place in an encyclopedia. Lordevi(talk) 02:01, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

MOS:HONORIFIC may be relevant to this. Kaldari (talk) 22:19, 8 December 2011 (UTC)


Poor writing and xenophobia

Well this has been quite a labor of love, but I wanted to update with several maintenance issues, accurate referencing, and removal of plagiarism that I took care of.

Someone above insightfully wrote:

The End Time, End Times, or End of Days are the eschatological writings in the three Abrahamic religions" Huh? No, the End Times are described in eschatological writings; the writings themselves are not the End Times!

I think this is a very sharp observation. There is a separate article in Wikipedia on eschatology which is centered around the Abrahamic religions. This article, however, is on End time, a concept which is clearly referenced in Hinduism (for several thousand pages of the Vedas). Likewise Bhuddism clearly talks about the end time for Bhuddism, predicting it to occur 5000 years after he lived (which is roughly 2500 years from now), after which Bhuddism would be forgotten and a new bhodisattva would be needed to reveal dharma.

As such, the intro paragraph should not read Abrahamic religions and miscellaneous, it should list the 5 largest faiths of the world, and each of their end time scenarios respectively, in order to present a more objective and encyclopedic view.

Unfortunately, this was not possible before as the section on Bhuddism was not well researched. In addition, it was plagiarized directly from another website. I deleted the copied subsection, included the website as a reference, and mostly rewrote a correct new section that accurately reflects Bhuddist belief. The section on Hinduism had serious grammatical problems and appears that it was written by a non-native English speaker. As such I rewrote it as well, but preserved the factual content as best as possible. I also added in at least 10-20 more missing references.

Why have I spent the last 5 hours on this article?! Please let me know if any feedback or revisions and thanks everyone for your great work so far. Parsh (talk) 09:14, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

I also believe there should be a section for the atheist or secular concept of end time. End time is a concept, not a religion. Please let me know if any objections. Parsh (talk) 13:04, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

I think you have significantly improved the article and a section on secular concepts of end times could be useful. I think the Theosophical views of Maitreya should not be mixed into the Buddhist section since Theosophists are not Buddhists. Jojalozzo 16:50, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Also, armageddononline.org is not a reliable site. I removed that reference and the reference to maitreya.org. I noticed that the main Buddhist eschatology article also lacks sources. Jojalozzo 21:12, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Those are all really helpful observations, thanks for taking a close look. I was first rewriting the piece, but I agree it is a good idea to look more closely at the references. Please advise if you think of anything else. Parsh (talk) 14:09, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Tanakh

An editor earlier noted that the Tanakh section has incredibly long quotations. While I certainly am not downplaying the importance of the text, as I appreciate the delicate nature of an article like this, some of the quotation may not be entirely pertinent to the subject of End time, and other parts could be summarized and worded so as to make the article easier to read and flow better.

I believe it's in Elements of Style but it is good technique to not have more than quotation than text, and that section is 95% quotation, 5% text. I will parse it down in two weeks if no one has an objection. Parsh (talk) 01:02, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

I say go for it. Be bold. No need to wait. Jojalozzo 01:07, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm working on another article first :) Thanks for the quick feedback. Parsh (talk) 01:32, 22 November 2012 (UTC)


Tanakh/Old Testament and New Testament

There are a total of 4 quotes from the Old Testament and 2 from the New Testament, for a total of about 7-8 pages of text and with only a few lines of surrounding text. The New Testament quotes are fairly explicit, but I will support them with surrouding text. There is a lot of overlap between the quotes, with some things said 5-6x. To show this I have broken it down line by line to show my logic, as I do understand the delicate nature of the topic (show your work as my physics professors used to say): — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lenny Kaufman (talk • contribs) 17:13, 25 November 2012 (UTC) (a.k.a. Chantoke/Parsh)

Deuteronomy 4:29-39

But if from thence thou shalt seek the LORD thy God, thou shalt find him, if thou seek him with all thy heart and with all thy soul.
Seek out God.

When thou art in tribulation, and all these things are come upon thee, even in the latter days, if thou turn to the LORD thy God, and shalt be obedient unto his voice; (For the LORD thy God is a merciful God;) he will not forsake thee, neither destroy thee, nor forget the covenant of thy fathers which he sware unto them.
When the trials start, turn to God, he's on your side.

For ask now of the days that are past, which were before thee, since the day that God created man upon the earth, and ask from the one side of heaven unto the other, whether there hath been any such thing as this great thing is, or hath been heard like it?
If you think about it, nothing has been this big since the beginning of man.

Did ever people hear the voice of God speaking out of the midst of the fire, as the seas turn black and feel like mud, and all will know the wrath and atonement of their sins? Or hath God assayed to go and take him a nation from the midst of another nation, by temptations, by signs, and by wonders, and by war, and by a mighty hand, and by a stretched out arm, and by great terrors, according to all that the LORD your God did for you in Egypt before your eyes?
Have you ever heard of God in flame? How about the sea turning into mud? Everybody's in trouble. Hopefully got has chosen some of us to get through this with special signs, like he did back in Egypt.

Unto thee it was shewed, that thou mightest know that the LORD he is God; there is none else beside him. Out of heaven he made thee to hear his voice, that he might instruct thee: and upon earth he shewed thee his great fire; and thou heardest his words out of the midst of the fire.
I showed you this so you could know how strong I was. Also, remember, my voice is in fire.

And because he loved thy fathers, therefore he chose their seed after them, and brought thee out in his sight with his mighty power out of Egypt; to drive out nations from before thee greater and mightier than thou art, to bring thee in, to give thee their land for an inheritance, as it is this day.
God loved your ancestors, which is you're here today. He did it for you, you owe him.

Know therefore this day, and consider it in thine heart, that the LORD he is God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath: there is none else.
And, again, I am the only God.

- Deuteronomy 4:29-39 (King James Version) --- I realize this is quite long, and so thanks if you if you made it this far. To summarize the paraphrasing:

'Seek out God. When the trials start, turn to God, He's on your side. If you think about it, nothing has been this big since the beginning of man. Have you ever heard of God's voice in flames? How about the sea turning into mud? Everybody's in trouble. Hopefully God has chosen some of us to get through this with special signs, like He did back in Egypt, don't forget Egypt. Now you know how strong he is. Also, again, His voice is in fire. God loved your ancestors, which is you're here today. He did it for you, and you really owe him. And, again, there is only one God, and that's God. - Deuteronomy 4:29-39 (King James Version) '

Isaiah 2:1-5

The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem. And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.
God is going to make his home on top of a mountain, and be exalted.

And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
Let's go to the mountain and see God.

And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more."
He'll judge us, and we'll stop fighting

Isaiah 2:1-5 - God will make his home on top of the mountain, exalted. Let's go visit him. He will judge us and people will stop fighting. - Isaiah 2:1-5 (King James Version)

Micah 4:1-5 - Essentially Identical to Isaiah 2:1 (above)

But in the last days it shall come to pass, that the mountain of the house of the LORD shall be established in the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills; and people shall flow unto it.

God is going to make his home on top of a mountain.

And many nations shall come, and say, Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, and to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for the law shall go forth of Zion, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
People are going to want to visit him and learn.

And he shall judge among many people, and rebuke strong nations afar off; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.
He'll judge us, and we'll stop fighting

But they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree; and none shall make them afraid: for the mouth of the LORD of hosts hath spoken it.
People will relax because God said so.

For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of the LORD our God for ever and ever."
We will always follow him.

Micah 4:1-5 - God is going to make his home on top of the mountain, where people will want to visit him. He will judge us, the fighting will stop, people will calm down and follow God. - Micah 4:1-5 (King James Version)


New Testament Quotes

The New Testament, in this case, repeats some of the Old Testament, but also has some very specific additions. Especially Luke--his description of the end is bone chilling, and I think needs to be directly quoted.

Luke 21:20-33

And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, bad times approach.

Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter there into. For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
At that point, everyone needs to leave Israel, no one should come in, no questions asked. These are times of vengeance, when the prophecies come true.

But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
It's the worst for the pregnant and nursing. People are going to be killed by swords, become prisoner, and Jeursalem is going to be taken over by gentiles.
And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.
There will be astrological signs and bad weather.

And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
Then you will see the Messiah (see: Son of Man in a cloud.

And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh. And he spoke to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees; When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand. So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand.
These are the signs of the end of time.

Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled. Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away."
So, watch out.'''


Luke 21:20-33 - When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, bad times approach. At that point, everyone needs to leave Israel, no one should come in, no questions asked. These are times of vengeance, when the prophecies come true. It's the worst for the pregnant and nursing. People are going to be killed by swords, become prisoner, and Jeursalem is going to be taken over by gentiles. There will be astrological signs and bad weather. Then you will see the Messiah (see: Son of Man) in a cloud. These are the signs of the end of time.

Mark 13:14-20


  • But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains: And let him that is on the housetop not go down into the house, neither enter therein, to take any thing out of his house: And let him that is in the field not turn back again for to take up his garment. But woe to them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
  • Again the description of the Antichrist, with an implicit wink, and the stern instructions to stay on top of your roofs and inside the fields, and people that dealing with pregnancy/newborn issues are in trouble. Things will be pretty much the worst they've ever been for everone except the elect.
    (Mark 13:14-20)
  • And pray ye that your flight be not in the winter. For in those days shall be affliction, such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be. And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect's sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days.|Mark 13:14-20 (King James Version)}}
  • The winter is going to be the worst time because of a disease that will eat flesh. This will affect everyone but the elect.
  • Summary of Mark 13:14-20 - When you see the evil that Daniel spoke of, then run to the mountains. Don't come out your house, if you're away from home, don't come back, and if you're pregnant or nursing, you are in trouble.

Matthew 24:15-22

  • When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand).
    Vivid description of the desolate landscape.
  • Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains. Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house. Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
  • But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day. For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

* Summary of Matthew: When you see the coomplete desolation, run to the mountains, don't leave your housetop, if you're in the fields don't come back in to town, and if you are pregnant or nursing you're in trouble. Don't run on holidays or the winter. Everyone's flesh will be scourged, except for the elect.- - Matthew 24:15-22 (King James Version) --

I have tried to be extremely careful not to make my own interpretations Basically I cut out some of the redundancies that doesn't add to the encyclopedic format, more so with Tanakh. Right now I am trying to get the body of it to match with the articles Maranatha and Christian eschatological views. More work than expected. Parsh (talk) 23:15, 25 November 2012 (UTC)


Bhuddism end time

I am having difficulty finding reliable references for Bhuddism End Time. I came across this, which was by the Dalai Lama in 1901:

http://www.sacred-texts.com/journals/oc/gppt6.htm

It seems pretty accurate. If no more comprehensive or original source is found, I will write this into the section. Comments? Bueller? Parsh (talk) 17:05, 25 November 2012 (UTC)


Updates

I added a few pictures, rewrote the long quotes as discussed above at the earlier portions of the article (primarily Tanakh). Issues left:

  • Flesh out Tanakh section, either by restoring more of the original or with added references to provide a non primary source (we need a secondary source).
After looking through rabbinical teachings and end of days descriptions in Deuteronomy and Isaiah, I have added considerable additional material and inline references to the Judaism section. Parsh (talk) 06:07, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
I have significantly edited the Judaism section. The section on Tanakh being divided from Messianic Age was arbitrary because most of the Messianic Age is in Isaiah, which is itself in Nevi'im. I believe I have also addressed the issue of needed secondary and tertiary sources for which the article was labelled in July, so I propose that this be removed (if anyone is reading this besides me..). Parsh (talk) 08:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Bhuddism section still needs citations.
Will likely use http://www.sacred-texts.com/journals/oc/gppt6.htm
Secondary source would be good if anyone knows one.
Found good primary and secondary sources for Bhuddism section. Digha Nikaya 26, in case you're wondering.
Remaining points are references for Norse mythology and Rastafarian sections. Not sure why I'm typing this, talking to myself. Parsh (talk) 11:34, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Regarding Buddhism -- there are two foretellings that I have come across Maitreya and the Sermon of the Seven Suns. The first is a rebirth narrative, the second an apocalyptic one. Does anyone know which occurs first? Or are they contradictory texts? I may have to go fishing for an editor with more expertise than me on Bhuddism. I have 3 physical secondary sources on Bhuddism and countless online and if one eschaton is mentioned, the other usually is not, at least in the books and reliable sources. Anyone know better? I will describe them as parallel narratives if I can't find a source describing them in sequence. Parsh (talk) 13:27, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Success! I figured it out -- Maitreya comes first, and his appearance signals the (seven) suns to go supernova. http://books.google.com/books?id=0lyEdhOnPIoC&pg=PA402&lpg=PA402&dq=%22seven+suns%22+maitreya&source=bl&ots=KTESiJtcQ4&sig=7Ze5uymSmoZXaqvNYjwUHXeiRwc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=FcC0UKm5HqK0ygG5voGQDw&ved=0CEgQ6AEwBjgK#v=onepage&q=%22seven%20suns%22%20maitreya&f=false
Fingers crossed, my hope is to ultimately get this article back to GA status, even featured. I believe it can be done. Parsh (talk) 13:31, 27 November 2012 (UTC)


Greek Gods

The general consensus from looking at sources is that there is no true eschatology or end time sequence in the greek myths. The story that the article has had has been Cronos telling Zeus he would be killed by his own children. However, I believe that myth was fulfilled when Athena sprung from Zeus's head. Regardless, I can find no outside reference (first, second or third) that can verify what has been entered here, and I think it qualifies as original research WP:OR. As such I am considering deleting it. Let me know your thoughts. Parsh (talk) 15:24, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

I went ahead and deleted it and expanded Norse mythology. There will be more smaller edits, but no more major changes from my current perspective. Parsh (talk) 15:58, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned references in End time

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of End time's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "cooper":

  • From Bahá'í Faith: Cooper, Roger (1993). "Death Plus 10 years". HarperCollins: 20. ISBN 0-00-255045-8. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help); Invalid |ref=harv (help)
  • From List of conspiracy theories: Cooper, Roger (1993). Death Plus 10 years. HarperCollins. p. 200. ISBN 0-00-255045-8.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 19:01, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

This reference no longer appears in this article. -- Beland (talk) 03:10, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Islam

The section on Islam is completely unreferenced and I will patch that up. If any other weak points in the article, please address, otherwise I guess it's just me and the bots for now. Parsh (talk) 07:26, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Islam section looks far better. No major issues that I can see. Parsh (talk) 11:14, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Maitreyu and Sermon of the Seven Suns

I have found a number of resources that discuss either Maitreyu, or the Seven Suns sermon, but none that talk about them together, or in relation to one another. Is anyone aware of a good source that tells which occurs first? Parsh (talk) 11:14, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

The article now says this is not specified in canonical texts. -- Beland (talk) 03:44, 18 February 2022 (UTC)


Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on End time. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:25, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on End time. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:38, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Archive 1
Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:End_time/Archive_1&oldid=1136700004"