Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
In a manner of speaking, but then the 1st cent. C.E. was really no different in this regard from the past 400–500 years in Palestine. Some of the most prolific apocalyptic activity occurs during the Ptolemaic and Seleucid periods in history, leading up to the Maccabbean revolt in Jerusalem c. 170–160 B.C.E. Antiochus IV was almost universally considered in Judaism to be the equivalent of the Christian "AntiChrist". There is also evidence that many Jews thought the same of Ptolemy I c. 300 B.C.E. By the time of Jesus, expectation of the "Last Days" was nothing new. In many respects, his own eschatology and that of the Church was merely constructed upon well established ideas and teachings that had been prevalent for centuries.
I think Armstrong is generally correct, at least as far as Christian fundamentalism/evangelicalism is concerned. I'm not too sure about her appraisal of Islamic history, and she has been roundly criticized for her presentation of it. My own ideas on the subject appear in post #81 at the top of page five in this thread:http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthread.php?t=54557&page=5. |
Thanks for that. That was truly a great discussion and sort of formulates some of the questions that I've begun to consider in my young age. It's sort of a tough world to live in these days.
In regards to a previous discussion in a thread about the half-century's greatest intellectuals, I've been reading quite a bit of E.O. Wilson lately. I think the world needs more thinkers like that. He teaches so much to both fundamentalists and reductionists with such a measure of moderation, it's amazing.