Skip to main content

Judgement Day

An 89 year old American man, Mr. Harold Camping, has spent quite a large amount of money trying to persuade people, largely in the US, that the "according to Biblical prophecy" the world will enter the "End Times" with a huge Earthquake the day after tomorrow.

According to Science it won't.

Mr. Camping, who seems a perfectly pleasant but perhaps rather confused figure, is probably no different from many other people who begin to believe impossible things- and by no means all of them are senile.

What IS different is the media attention- after all from the media perspective, the end of the world is a pretty big story, although Mr. Camping is probably receiving rather less attention than the sale of Princess Beatrice of York's wedding hat. So I guess that means that Mr. Camping is not widely believed.

What I feel a sad about is that the large amount of money being spent promoting this fairy story is not only essentially wasted money, it is also going to discredit still further organised religion in general. Yet there are some great moral truths which can be found amongst the Hebrew myths and the general smiting of the Bible. The Sermon on the Mount is one of the great moral manifestos ever conceived, the Decalogue of Moses is as clear a set of rules to live by as may be found anywhere.

However this most profound morality is being held up to ridicule by an old man with something of a screw loose. Instead of a sophisticated morality, religion is turned into a laughing stock because Mr. Camping, like so many, sees only the sensationalist myths of the Book of Revelation, which in any event is a highly symbolic chapter, and one that has been subject to wildly different interpretation and dispute over the centuries.

Science, provable and exact in boundary if not in all details, has increasingly addressed issues that the Bible purports to explain, and in many issues it is giving us a far greater insight into our Universe and ourselves. Yet Science and Religion are not equivalent protagonists, as many divines and media commentators might have you think. Religion seeks for a core of truth, but at its heart it makes a leap of faith- that there are things we must take on trust, but if we do so, then we arrive a profound truth and a great certainty. Science does not do this- it proceeds with scepticism and thus seeks to improve knowledge by understanding uncertainty. Religion therefore is certain but Science is uncertain.

This certainty has been the cause of much human suffering- but it is not my place here to condemn such crimes as the Inquisition or the Crusades. It is simply to note that Mr. Camping comes from a long line of millenarian nonsense. I suppose we should just be grateful that he is only wasting money in promoting his certainty- after all many times in the past it has been a price of lives that has been paid.

Of course Science may admit the theoretical possibility that they could be wrong and Mr. Camping, in defiance of all we currently understand about the Universe, is right. However, I do not think that Mr. Camping will return the compliment, at least not until after Sunday. So in the overwhelmingly likely event that we awake on just another normal Sunday the day after Mr. Camping's non-apocalypse, I guess it will be another victory for Science.

Though Mr. Camping may then deserve much ridicule, Science will be able to explain the breakdown in his faculties that enabled him to spout such silliness in the first place. Indeed perhaps we should then probably simply show sympathy for a baffled and confused old man.

Comments

Bianda Cullen said…
Healthy Recipes Cooking
http://cookingtherecipes.blogspot.com/
Newmania said…
Terrific article I often think about this very subject which,I take to be,reconciling faith with the bizarre claims made in its name.

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...