This is a thread about a fairly random observation, that just struck me as interesting. It could have gone here, or maybe history, or maybe community, or maybe even possibly Social Issues and Current Events, with the right spin. I decided here.
I'll bet I'm not the only forum member who, once upon a time, had a subscription to Strategy and Tactics magazine. For those not familiar, it was a magazine devoted to military history and, specifically, wargaming, i.e. simulating battles and wars using cardboard counters and dice, usually with a map printed with hexagons representing terrain. Each issue had a game representing one or more battles or wars throughout history.
Wait...you said religion....patience.
Periocdically, I take out my old games and read the magazine articles, or even set one up and play it, solitaire. It's not often, but once in a while. Yesterday, I found myself pulling out the oldest magazine game I had, from 1972. The title game for that issue was called "Armageddon". It actually covered generic warfare from the ancient world, about 3,000 BC to about 500 BC. It took its name from the first battle to be simulated in the rules. The Battle of Megiddo, during the reign of Thutmose III, fought against the King of Kadesh.
It's the first recorded battle in the Middle East or Europe. (I don't know if there is anything older recorded in China, India, or elsewhere.) By "recorded battle", I mean anything known beyond who fought and who won. There's a time, and place, and some description of the forces.
Anyway, in Hebrew, the name of that place is "Har Megiddon", or "Armageddon", more recognizable as the place where Revelations foretold would be the site of the last battle of the world, which led to these comments in a magazine sidebar. The general topic of the sidebar being whether that was a good choice for the name of the game.
"....They will point out that the only mention in the Bible is Revelations 16:16 - the site of the Last Battle between the forces of the Lord and Satan....
Actually, Armageddon is an appropriate name. Since it was the site of the Last Battle in a sense warfare comes full circle at Megiddo/Armageddon. Before Megiddo, there was no recorded history of war and after Armageddon there will be no more war"
There are also some Biblical references in the article, noting which period in Egyptian history probably corresponded to the Hebrew captivity period, and citing the Bible as an authoritative source for other events in Middle Eastern history.
What struck me as interesting was that the author clearly considered that he was speaking factually. He surely believed that at some unknown point in the future there would be a battle at Megiddo that would be the thing that triggered the second coming of Jesus and the end of the world.
Moreover, he printed that in a magazine, and the magazine wsn't about religion. It was about military history.
So, in 1972, the author of a magazine that was part of pop culture, being delivered to a cross section of the US population, not associated in any way with religion, would not think twice about stating Bibleical prophecy, and history, as if it were fact. There were no "Christians believe...." disclaimers. The culture was so steeped in Christianity that they didn't see a need to add such qualifying words. Armageddon will be the site of the Last Battle (sic).
How far we have come since 1972. I think for most of us reading this, it will indeed be seen as progress. In 1972, I probably wouldn't have noticed anything curious about the inclusion of that sidebar. Of course it was appropriate. After all, it was a Christian nation. Everyone was Christian, right? Well, there were a few Jews and some bad people were atheists, but normal people believed in the Bible. (My actual subscription didn't begin until some years later, after I had joined the ranks of atheists myself. I bought this copy on Ebay a few years back. I still collect old wargame magazines.)
I suppose S&T wasn't a random cross section of America. People interested in wargaming in 1972 were probably a bit more conservative than average. The hippies probably didn't spend their time playing Afrika Korps. However, it was still a general interest audience, as opposed to a religious one. Certainly all religious beliefs and political opinions would be represented in the subscriber base, even if conservatives were somewhat more represented than in the overall population. Despite that, in 1972, they weren't concerned that people might cancel their subscriptions due to proselytizing.
Anyway, it's not something deeply profound, or something truly remarkable. it's just something that struck me as interesting. The world really has changed, a lot, since our childhood.
P.S. And....it was B.C., and elsewhere in the magazine, A.D. None of this C.E. stuff.
via International Skeptics Forum https://ift.tt/C329seL
I've taken the liberty of copying these more recent posts to a new thread as the police response to this is now key to the event and it's worthy of its own thread