[x]

Thanks for the response. You undercut your own original argument, though. Whatever people think about one particular "end is nigh" preacher, there's a lot more interest on the part of the general public in Biblical prophesies and the Apocalypse than in this Mayan calendar thing.

That's especially true if it can be given a new packaging: the Bible code, the da Vinci code, etc. You might think of all that as heretical, but still, they attracted more people than the Mayan thing.

If you're saying that the media and urban sophisticates believe in or respect the Mayan thing more, I'm not sure. They don't really believe in it. They're just looking for something new to talk about, something that will sell magazines or kill time, but the Mayan end of the world has always been kind of a joke.

Of course, they don't think much of Bible prophecy either. That's also something used to boost circulation. If you're looking for something people really worried about, the Y2K thing fits better. It seems hilarious now, but there was a lot of real anxiety about whether our technology would collapse when the year 2000 came around.

[fwdude]

Good points. And what's being falsely invented about the Mayan apocalypse thing is that it's a world-ending event, when it is really just the end of a Mayan calendar cycle. You're right, this is being capitalized upon by big monied entrepreneurs to make a buck.

But these things always seem to bring out the haters of biblical prophesy. My point is that the same people who denigrate Judeo/Christian eschatology simply substitute their own version and call it "scientific."