From: Michael Smith <>

 

In my opinion, yes. We have had over 700,000 last days since Jesus was

here, and they will continue ’till He returns.

 

Why do I think that?

 

The term “last days” occurs 5 times in the NT (or in my NIV anyway).

 

Acts 2:17, 2 Tim 3:1, Heb 1:2, Jam 5:3, 2 Pet 3:3

 

If you read Acts 2:17-21 by itself, it sounds a lot like an Apocolyptic,

end of the world type passage. However, if you read a few verses before

and after, it becomes clear that Peter (who is speaking at the time)

was talking about his present time. Peter was demonstrating how the

prophecy of Joel was being fulfilled as people watched.

 

Peter clearly thought that the “last days” had begun.

 

[2:14] Then Peter stood up with the Eleven, raised his voice and

addressed the crowd: “Fellow Jews and all of you who live in Jerusalem,

let me explain this to you; listen carefully to what I say.

[2:15] These men are not drunk, as you suppose. It’s only nine in the

morning!

[2:16] No, this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel:

[2:17] “‘In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all

people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see

visions, your old men will dream dreams.

[2:18] Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my

Spirit in those days, and they will prophesy.

[2:19] I will show wonders in the heaven above and signs on the earth

below, blood and fire and billows of smoke.

[2:20] The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before

the coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord.

[2:21] And everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.’*

[2:22] “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man

accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did

among you through him, as you yourselves know.

 

 

 

In 2 Timothy 3, Paul refers to the “last days” in future tense.

However, the description of the last days sounds a lot like today.

Passages like this lead many to believe that the “last days” refers to

right now. The problem is, people have been believing that throughout

history.

 

2 Tim 3:1-5 (NIV)

[3:1] But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days.

[3:2] People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful,

proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy,

[3:3] without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control,

brutal, not lovers of the good,

[3:4] treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than

lovers of God–

[3:5] having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to

do with them.

 

First century, middle ages, reformation, last century and this century.

The description has remained accurate. Only the details have changed.

Were all the others wrong? Not really: the last days were upon us then

and still are.

 

In Hebrews 1 and James 5, again the authors refer to the “last days” in

the present tense.

Heb 1:1-2 (NIV)

[1:1] In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at

many times and in various ways,

[1:2] but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he

appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.

 

James 5:3 (NIV)

[5:3] Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify

against you and eat your flesh like fire. You have hoarded wealth in the

last days.

 

In 2 Peter 3, the “last days” are again spoken of in a future tense, but

the context suggests (to me, at least) the immediate future. It seems

to serve as a warning for Peter’s readers on how to behave in these last

days.

 

2 Peter 3:3-4 (NIV)

[3:3] First of all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers

will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires.

[3:4] They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since

our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of

creation.”

 

 

The last days *will* end. It might be tonight. It might be another

10,000 years. Doesn’t matter. Even if the Lord doesn’t come tomorrow,

you might get run over by a bus. So live each day as if you are

preparing to meet the Lord.

 

One day you will be right.

 

Michael Smith

 

 

From:  (Paul Brebner)

 

I agree. If you read the NT with an “eschatological” hat on,

you certainly get the idea that both the gospel and epistle

writers believed they were witnessing the beginning of the “last

days”.

 

Another possible example is the “mini apocalypse” in Matthew (?).

Peter Bolt has written a thesis/paper on this from a narrative reading

perspective, and concludes that the closure of the story is most

likely contained in the story of the gospel itself, the events

of the death and resurrection of Jesus, not outside the gospel

(i.e. in subsequent or future – even to us – events).

 

Paul.

 

From: “Darren R Middleton” <>

 

G’day Paul,

 

Paul Brebner wrote in message <>…

>I agree. If you read the NT with an “eschatological” hat on,

>you certainly get the idea that both the gospel and epistle

>writers believed they were witnessing the beginning of the “last

>days”.

 

 

The whole of the N.T is eschatological by nature… It is looking

forward to the second coming. The last days were inaugurated with the

incarnation, and will end with the return of the Lord. Everything in

between is the last days (as Mike pointed out), or as the Apostle John

says, the last hour.

 

 

History of World /**second coming

Evil Times Prevail /

———-/\——/\——/?

/ \ / \ /

/ \/ \/

——/——-/——–/—–

Good Times Prevail

 

(hope this looks O.K?)

 

 

At diff points in history we have experienced both good & evil times. In

Evil times the spirit of the Antichrist is influential, within &

without the Church.

However, before our Lord’s return, there will be a concentration of evil

followed by the man of lawlessness (Antichrist) then this will herald

the second coming of Christ. We never know (except our pre-mill friends

;-)) if this will be the time (when in a time of evil) that will usher

in the Lord’s return, hence the call to watchful.

 

BTW, usage of the term *soon* or *quickly* by the N.T writers does not

mean that the writers expected the return in their lifetime like some

liberals have thought. the meaning of returning soon is that it *might*

happen at any moment.

It like a man’s answering machine. The message informs the caller that

he is away from his phone but will return ****soon****. He uses the same

message whether he expects to be gone two minutes, two weeks, or two

months – the simple reason is he wants to encourage his caller without

revealing exactly how long he will be gone.

 

Come Lord Jesus.

 

Regards

Darren Middleton

 

 

From: “Daniel” <>

 

How old is the universe? Recently I read that most scientists say 10 – 20

thousand billion years old. Let me do a quick calculation … what is the

probability that today is the last day of history/this existence as we know

it? The last 10 – 20 thousand million years weren’t.

 

Probability = around 1 in 365 000 000 000 to 730 000 000 000

 

The odds are looking good fellas! But there is that one in 365 to 730

thousand millionth of a chance and if you want to bank your lives on that,

be my guest! Meanwhile I’ll keep living and having a good time, in healthy

relationship to God of course (!), and if the world ends, I guess it will

have ended.

 

Even if you take the fundamentalist calculations of the earth being only

about 6000 years old, that still gives a probability of 1 in 2 190 000. I

know which odds I’ll take and I still seem to find good reason to live in

relationship with my Creator!

 

I hope this gives a good laugh to some and perhaps a bit of perspective to

others.

 

Regards,

 

Daniel McLean 
 

 

From: Michael Smith <>

 

Daniel wrote:

>

> How old is the universe? Recently I read that most scientists say 10 – 20

> thousand billion years old. Let me do a quick calculation … what is the

> probability that today is the last day of history/this existence as we know

> it? The last 10 – 20 thousand million years weren’t.

>

> Probability = around 1 in 365 000 000 000 to 730 000 000 000

 

 

I know it said “humour” (and even spelled it right) but the pedant in me

can’t let that pass.

 

Your probability proposal has no mathematical basis at all.

 

It’s like saying that I’ve been playing lotto for 100 days, so the

probability that I’ll win tomorrow is 1 in 100.

 

Makes no sense.

 

Sorry.

 

Michael Smith

 

 

From: “Daniel” <>

 

This depends on what basis you use for your statistical analysis. If you

were to use previous experience for analysis, you would likely count all

the previous days which have been and then all those which were the end of

the world – as I did. But yes, if the end of the world was to be flagpoled

by certain events and you accepted the apocalyptic words of the Bible as

being literal in nature, then I guess you may come to a different

conclusion. The literary genre of apocalyptic needs careful analysis, not

amateurish speculation as is most common.

 

Regards,

 

Daniel McLean
 

 

From: Marcelo Cantos <>

 

Michael Smith <> writes:

 

> Daniel wrote:

> >

> > How old is the universe? Recently I read that most scientists say 10 – 20

> > thousand billion years old. Let me do a quick calculation … what is the

> > probability that today is the last day of history/this existence as we know

> > it? The last 10 – 20 thousand million years weren’t.

> >

> > Probability = around 1 in 365 000 000 000 to 730 000 000 000

>

>

> I know it said “humour” (and even spelled it right) but the pedant in me

> can’t let that pass.

>

> Your probability proposal has no mathematical basis at all.

 

Actually it does. The probability that any one day chosen at random

is in the last 10% of the universe’s history is 10%. This means that

there is a 10% probability that the current age of the universe (we’ll

call it C) is between 90% and 100% the final age. Hence, the final

age could be between C and C/0.9, with 10% probability.

 

Now, we can reassess this for the probability that this is the last

day (we’ll keep it simple by assuming that it is currently midnight,

and we’ll generalise by saying that the universe is C days old). What

we want to know, then, is the probability that the final age of the

universe is between C and C + 1, ie: the probability that we are in

the last 1 / (C + 1) part of the universe is simply 1 / (C + 1) which

is approximately 1 / C for C >> 1. Hence the above calculation is

pretty much spot on.

 

> It’s like saying that I’ve been playing lotto for 100 days, so the

> probability that I’ll win tomorrow is 1 in 100.

 

Not really. It’s more like saying that you’ve had a 100 day losing

streak, so the probability that the losing streak will end tomorrow is

1 in 100. In the absence of any knowledge whatsoever of the

probabilities inherent in the game itself, this is actually a

perfectly reasonable assumption (actually, 1 in 101 is better). After

all, you have no idea what the average length of a losing streak is.

 

> Makes no sense.

 

The above analysis is quite counter-intuitive and it took me some time

to come to terms with it when I first encountered it, but if you stare

at it for a while you come to realise that it is perfectly sound.

 

This sort of calculation is actually used in estimating the likely

longevity of nonce entities, though it is usually used to set upper

and lower bounds within the mid-range. For instance, there is a 60%

probability that the earth is in the middle 60% of its life. Hence

there is a 60% probability that the earth will last between 1.25 and 5

times its current lifespan (ie: 1/0.8 and 1/0.2).

 

> Sorry.

 

Think nothing of it! 🙂

 

One caveat to keep in mind is that this is a last-resort estimating

technique. If, for instance, you know that the probability of winning

the lotto is 1e-6, then that’s the probability of winning tomorrow,

regardless of how many times you’ve lost before. (Probabilities are

directly affected by knowledge. For instance, Fred asks Bill to guess

which of two face-down cards is the Ace. Bill picks one. What is the

probability that it is the Ace? Answer: it depends on whether you are

Fred or Bill.)

 

Boy do I know how to ramble on! Sorry folks.

 

 

Cheers,

Marcelo

 

Disclaimer: I’m not a statistician and I just read about this in some

magazine (I think it was _Scientific_American_, and I’m desperately

hoping that I don’t later discover that it was the April 1st edition!

🙂

 

 

From:  (Danny Yee)

 

Marcelo Cantos <> wrote:

>The probability that any one day chosen at random

>is in the last 10% of the universe’s history is 10%.

 

Only if the universe is finite! (The evidence available at the moment

suggests that the average mass density of the universe is *not* high

enough to close it, and that the universe will continue to expand

forever. Omega < 1.)

 

>Hence the above calculation is pretty much spot on.

 

I think the analysis should go something like this. The odds on us being

in the first 5% of the universe’s lifespan are 1 in 20. Therefore there

is a 1 in 20 chance that the universe will last as long as 200 billion

years (assuming 10 billion to be the current age — it’s a nice round

number). The odds on us being in the last 5% of the universe’s lifespan

are also 1 in 20. So the chances of the universe ending in the next

0.5 billion years is 1 in 20. If the universe ends in the next year,

we will be in the last 0.00000001% of its existence, so the odds should

be around there…

 

>After

>all, you have no idea what the average length of a losing streak is.

 

Totally irrelevant to deciding whether your losing streak will end

tomorrow, because the chances in tomorrow’s gambling session are (we

can assume) *totally independent* of the results of previous gambling

sessions.

 

Danny.

 

 

From: Marcelo Cantos <>

 

 (Danny Yee) writes:

 

> Marcelo Cantos <> wrote:

> >The probability that any one day chosen at random

> >is in the last 10% of the universe’s history is 10%.

>

> Only if the universe is finite! (The evidence available at the moment

> suggests that the average mass density of the universe is *not* high

> enough to close it, and that the universe will continue to expand

> forever. Omega < 1.)

 

I did point out that the technique is based on the premise that no

additional evidence is available. Introducing omega invalidates the

technique (but then you must introduce _all_ available factors such

as, say, the second coming! :-).

 

> >Hence the above calculation is pretty much spot on.

>

> I think the analysis should go something like this. The odds on us being

> in the first 5% of the universe’s lifespan are 1 in 20. Therefore there

> is a 1 in 20 chance that the universe will last as long as 200 billion

> years (assuming 10 billion to be the current age — it’s a nice round

> number). The odds on us being in the last 5% of the universe’s lifespan

> are also 1 in 20. So the chances of the universe ending in the next

> 0.5 billion years is 1 in 20. If the universe ends in the next year,

> we will be in the last 0.00000001% of its existence, so the odds should

> be around there…

 

I see absolutely no difference here other than that you have included

the first half as an additional case which is immediately discarded.

I could have done my calculation in exactly the same way with 5%

instead of 10% and come to exactly the same conclusion without

considering the first 5% scenario.

 

Furthermore, Daniel’s original calculation was for the last _day_, not

year.

 

> >After

> >all, you have no idea what the average length of a losing streak is.

>

> Totally irrelevant to deciding whether your losing streak will end

> tomorrow, because the chances in tomorrow’s gambling session are (we

> can assume) *totally independent* of the results of previous gambling

> sessions.

 

Actually, we can’t assume! If it’s chook-lotto and the car hasn’t

been won for a while they will start adding more car stickers to

wheel! 🙂

 

In any case, your argument still doesn’t hold even if the events are

independent. The probability we are arriving at is an _estimate_ of

the true probability (actually my point about the dependence of

probability on knowledge seems to have escaped you: probabilities are

_defined_ with reference to POV — in my previous posting, for Bill,

the probability is 0.5, for Fred it is 1 or 0 depending on which card

Bill picked. In fact it’s even more complex than that: prior to

Fred’s discovery of which card Bill picks, the probability for Fred is

also 0.5. Moreover, if Bill had X-Ray eyes, his probability would be

1). 1/(n+1) is our best-guess at the true probability of success

after n failures and hence _is_ the probability from our POV. Put

simply, if you lose 1000 times in a row, you can be reasonably

confident that the probability of a win is less than 0.5 and in

drawing such a conclusion you _have_ derived a knowledge of the

probability of winning tomorrow on the basis of past results. The

1/(n+1) rule simply provides a more objective way to arrive at an

estimate.

 

Cheers,

Marcelo