An Atheist's Message To "The Rapturites": "Leave Me Out Of This!"

If John Darby knew that when he began speaking on "The Rapture", that this would eventually lead to it being a term so ubiquitously known that it less than a century later, its definition need not be explained to the common American, one can only imagine that his heart would swell with a pious -- or not-so-pious -- pride. One could not fault him with failing to recognize his creation as being one of the greatest sources of modern existential risk; that his ideology could threaten the survival of the human race.

Now, normally this author attempts to avoid hyperbolistic writing. Unfortunately, despite the proclomation, "Belief in the Rapture could destroy the human race", there is no hyperbole here. There are times when seeing things in footage for yourself makes for a more viscerally appealing argument. With something as... contentious as this, then, such visceral appeal is a necessity. With that in mind, consider this the following video, "Rapture Ready", as pulled off of AlterNet (which is, of course, a deeply biased resource -- but in this case it is the message, not the messenger, that is significant.) Here we go:

On July 16, I attended Christians United for Israel's annual Washington-Israel Summit. Founded by San Antonio-based megachurch pastor John Hagee, CUFI has added the grassroots muscle of the Christian right to the already potent Israel lobby. Hagee and his minions have forged close ties with the Bush White House and members of Congress from Sen. Joseph Lieberman to Sen. John McCain. In its call for a unilateral military attack on Iran and the expansion of Israeli territory, CUFI has found unwavering encouragement from traditional pro-Israel groups like AIPAC and elements of the Israeli government.

[...]

Over a dozen CUFI members eagerly revealed to me their excitement at the prospect of Armageddon occurring tomorrow. Among the rapture ready was Republican Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay.

(Emphasis my own). As noted in the video, Mr. Hagee would have us believe that Christians for Israel only exists simply to "support" Israel in a positive, peaceful manner. If that were so, however, why would such language as this be fould on their front-page?:

Prophetic Lens of Scripture
By Henk Kamsteeg



Iran's president Mahmoud Amadinejad has said that the world would soon witness the destruction of the State of Israel. However, Amadinejad and Iran cannot curse Israel and escape God's judgment. "Jew-haters of the world need to know also that we have as much passion to support and defend Jewish lives as they have passion to destroy us". Read more...

One could truly wish that these people would start taking actual history lessons rather than holding to inductive reasoning derived from a single collection of books which were formally organized by no single agent nor with any concern for consistency. Take the difference between Canon and Apocrypha, and how they've been interchangeable over the centuries.

This idea of the end-times in our times is hardly new at all; one list in particular gives examples of such failed predictions from 30CE to 1990CE. While the only thing that differentiates Darby's predictions from that of William Miller's "Great Disappointment" is the lack of a specific date (or two, as the case may be), what is so dangerous about any of this? After all -- so what if the Christians for Israel group wants to speed up or "be prepared for" the Rapture?

It's simple enough: today, it is a rare individual who recognizes the origins of the modern conflict between the Arabic Middle East and the West. CNN has reported that it began with the foundation of Israel:

The search for peace in the Middle East dates back to the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948, a war following the invasion of the Jewish state by Arab countries, and the subsequent displacement of many Palestinian Arabs.

That certainly is a major demarcation point, but it is by no means the origin of "today's" Arab v. Occident conflict. That can be detailed back further to the establishment of the British colony, "Iraq", around 1917. And what, pray tell, were the british seeking in Iraq? Oil. The distrust goes back quite literally that far. And almost all attempts at pacification or conflict resolution, as engaged in by the UN, the US, and the rest of the "Western World" is by and large seen in the Arabic world as little more than a ploy to engender Israeli superiority; this is discussed in depth by a piece that can be found at the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA).

So where does this leave us? On the one hand we have extremist religious fanatics bent on obtaining the power to fulfil their believed divine mandate of global dominance, surrounded by what could otherwise be healthy, sane people with belief in a religion that proclaims itself the "religion of peace." On the other, we have... extremist religious fanatics bent on obtaining the power to fulfil their believed divine mandate of global dominance, surrounded by what could otherwise be healthy, sane people with belief in a religion that proclaims itself the "religion of peace." One side is backing those with nuclear weapons, egging them on to expand and in all manners be a belligerent state. The other side is different in only that its belligerent state lacks nuclear weapons -- we think.

So what, precisely, is the point of all this diatribe and rhetoric? To spell it out plainly: the world would be safer if John Darby had died in ignomy: the world would also be safer if enough people recognized the difference between anti-zionism and anti-semitism; but if if's and wishes could fill the belly, no one would starve. Should you be afraid of the "Rapturists"? That's a personal choice. But remember this: The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. Are people who believe in the Rapture evil? Perhaps, this is a judgment call. But with movement leaders like Hagee and DeLay, the question of whether or not "Christians for Israel" is lead by evil is answered before it is asked: their corruption marks them for all to see; the answer to the first question is found in Burke's comment and the the willful blindness to such corruption.

These people need to be stopped. The question is -- how? "At gunpoint" is right out, and so is legislation. What else is left, that has any hope of working? This author, obviously, has chosen to entrust to the (digital) pen. I can only hope that you, who read this, will find yourself a route to the same goal.