[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]

the best approach? Or was Armageddon so close upon us that even a day's delay could doom her for
eternity?
The pagan Ragnarok and the Christian Armageddon have this in common: The final battle will be
preceded by great signs and portents. Were we experiencing such omens? Margrethe thought so.
Myself, I found the idea that this world changing presaged Armageddon more attractive than the
alternative, i.e., paranoia on my part. Could a ship be wrecked and a world changed just to keep me
from checking a thumbprint? I had thought so at the time but - oh, come now, Alex, you are not that
important.
(Or was I?)
I have never been a Millenarianist. I am aware how often the number one thousand appears in the Bible,
especially in prophecy - but I have never believed that the Almighty was constrained to work in even
millennia - or any other numbering patterns - just to please numerologists.
On the other hand I know that many thousands of sensible and devout people place enormous
importance on the forthcoming end of the Second Millennium, with Judgment Day and Armageddon and
all that must follow - expected at that time. They find their proofs in the Bible and claim confirmation in
the lines in the Great Pyramid and in a variety of Apocrypha.
But they differ among themselves as to the end of the millennium. 2000 AD? Or 2001 AD? Or is the
correct dating 3 pm Jerusalem local time April 7, 2030 AD? If indeed scholars have the time and date of
the Crucifixion - and the earthquake at the moment of His death - correctly figured against mundane time
reckoning. Or should it be Good Friday 2030 AD as calculated by the lunar calendar? This is no trivial
matter in view of what we are attempting to date.
But, if we take the birth of Christ rather than the date of the Crucifixion as the starting point from which
Generated by ABC Amber LIT Converter, http://www.processtext.com/abclit.html
to count, the millennia, it is evident at once that neither the naive date of 2000 AD nor the slightly less
naive date of 2001 can be the bimillenarian date because Jesus was born in Bethlehem on Christmas Day
year 5 BC.
Every educated person knows this and almost no one ever thinks about it.
How could the greatest event in all history, the birth of our Lord Incarnate, have been misdated by five
years? Incredible!
Very easily. A sixth-century monk made a mistake in arithmetic. Our present dating ('Anno Domini) was
not used until centuries after Christ was born. Anyone who has ever tried to decipher on a cornerstone a
date written in Roman numerals can sympathize with the error of Brother Dionysius Exiguus. In the sixth
century there were so few who could read at all that the error went undetected for many years - and by
then it was too late to change all the records. So we have the ludicrous situation that Christ was born five
years before Christ was born - an Irishism that can be resolved only by noting that one clause refers to
fact and the other clause refers to a false-to-fact calendar.
For two thousand years the good monk's error was of little importance. But now it becomes of supreme
importance. If the Millenarianists are correct, the end of the world can be expected Christmas Day this
year.
Please note that I did not say 'December 25th'. The day and month of Christ's birth are unknown.
Matthew notes that Herod was king; Luke states that Augustus was Caesar and that Cyrenius was
governor of Syria, and we all know that Joseph and Mary had traveled from Nazareth - to Bethlehem to
be counted and taxed.
There are no other data, neither of Holy Writ nor of Roman civil records.
So there you have it. By Millenarianist theory, the Final Judgment can be expected about thirty-five
years from now... or later this afternoon!
Were it not for Margrethe this uncertainty would not keep me awake nights. But how can I sleep if my
beloved is in immediate danger of being cast down into the Bottomless Pit, there to suffer throughout
eternity?
Generated by ABC Amber LIT Converter, http://www.processtext.com/abclit.html
What would you do?
Envision me standing barefooted on a greasy floor', washing dishes to pay off my indenture, while
thinking deep thoughts of last and first things. A laughable sight! But dishwashing does not occupy all the
mind; I was better off with hard bread for the mind to chew on.
Sometimes I contrasted my sorry state with what I had so recently been, while wondering if I would ever
find my way back through the maze into the place I had built for myself.
Would I want to go back? Abigail was there - and, while polygamy was acceptable in the Old
Testament, it was not accepted in the forty-six states. That had been settled once and for all when the
Union Army's artillery had destroyed the temple of the antichrist in Salt Lake City and the Army had
supervised the breaking up and diaspora of those immoral 'families'.
Giving up Margrethe for Abigail would be far too high a price to pay to resume the position of power
and importance I had until recently held. Yet I had enjoyed my work and the deep satisfaction over
worthwhile accomplishment that went with it. We had achieved our best year since the foundation was
formed - I refer to the non-profit corporation, Churches United for Decency. 'Non-profit' does not mean
that such an organization cannot pay appropriate salaries and even bonuses, and I had been taking a
well-earned vacation after the best fund-raising year of our history - primarily my accomplishment
because, as deputy director, my first duty was to see that our coffers were kept filled.
But I took even greater satisfaction in our labors in the vineyards, as fund raising means nothing if our
programs of spiritual welfare do not meet their goals.
The past 'year' had seen the following positive accomplishments:
a) A federal law making abortion a capital offense;
b) A federal law making the manufacture, sale, possession, importation, transportation, and/or use of any
contraceptive drug or device a felony carrying a mandatory prison sentence of not less than a year and a [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]