home
RSS
Doomsday ministry scrubs end of world predictions from website
Some of Harold Camping's followers believe that Doomsday did happen on May 21.
October 28th, 2011
10:12 AM ET

Doomsday ministry scrubs end of world predictions from website

By Dan Merica, CNN

(CNN) - The Christian radio broadcasting network that touted Harold Camping's failed doomsday predictions may be getting out of the prophecy business, adopting what appears to be a vaguer vision of the end times.

"We are to live so that we are ready for the return of Christ, and even pray for it," according to a Family Radio statement obtained by The Christian Post. "But we also rejoice in every new day, that we've been given another day to occupy and serve our Lord."

Gallery and explainer: Doomsdays through time

Family Radio, which Camping founded in 1958, had posted an explainer detailing why Camping's prediction that May 21 would be the beginning of the end didn't come to pass.

That explainer got yanked from the Family Radio website earlier this week.

Camping had originally said that those selected for salvation would be raptured up to heaven on May 21, and those left behind would face months of judgment amid destruction before the world's end on October 21.

Novel explores "The Leftovers" after the Rapture

The Family Radio website tweaked the prediction after May 21, saying God had shown mercy by sparing people five months of suffering. But final judgment was still slated to come on October 21, when salvation and the world's destruction would happen at once.

But according to the Christian Post, Family Radio is now painting a more fluid picture of doomsday, a departure from the definite dates that Camping set earlier in the year.

"Thy command is still to occupy until he comes," the statement obtained by Christian Post said. "We are still to go teach and tell. Every day we, who are Christians, live in attention.

CNN's calls to Harold Camping and Family Radio went unanswered.

When the world didn't end last week, Camping followers who gathered for a regular Sunday fellowship meeting questioned if they had been left behind, according to Brandon Tauszik, a documentarian who began attending the meetings this year.

"Numbers were a bit down, for the first time I had ever seen, but people showed up much like they did after May 21," said Tauszik, who attends the Oakland, California fellowship meetings out of interest and who never believed the world would end. "People were coming together, speaking outside, asking where we went wrong."

The faith of Camping's most ardent followers was not swayed by the recent news.

According to Fred Store, a longtime Family Radio listener, the general belief is "Judgment Day did in fact occur on May 21."

CNN's Jessica Ravitz contributed to this report.

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Christianity • End times

soundoff (1,318 Responses)
  1. Observer

    Is Family Radio going to announce that God had postponed the end of the world until after he sees who wins the World Series?

    October 28, 2011 at 12:40 pm |
  2. Reasonably

    So now that their doomsday predictions didn't come true they've turned into Occupy Earth?

    October 28, 2011 at 12:39 pm |
  3. TheDudeAbides

    They were right! The world ended October 21! However, the replacement world looks exactly like the old one, so no one noticed.

    Wait, wasn't that in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy?

    October 28, 2011 at 12:39 pm |
    • Steve - Dallas

      Yes, it looks just the same, even down to the fiddly bits.

      October 28, 2011 at 12:48 pm |
  4. ObamaJoe

    Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free

    October 28, 2011 at 12:39 pm |
    • ObamaJoe

      the darth is in the congress,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

      October 28, 2011 at 12:39 pm |
  5. Carmen

    Oh come on don't quit. I am sure you will get it right eventually

    October 28, 2011 at 12:39 pm |
  6. Sierra

    Referring to the Rapture: "Lift up your eyes to the heavens (sky), look at the earth beneath; the heavens (sky) will vanish like smoke, the earth will wear out like a garment and its inhabitants die like flies. But my salvation will last forever, my righteousness will never fail." Isaiah 51:6

    "HOWEVER, no one knows the day or hour when these things will happen, not even the angels in heaven or the Son himself. Only the Father knows." Matthew 24:36

    These 'Christians' are obviously being ignorant to their own Bible. It says in plain text know one knows, or is supposed to know, when these things are going to happen. They are nutcases.

    October 28, 2011 at 12:38 pm |
    • RAWoD

      You quote from a comic book and call THEM a nutcase?

      October 28, 2011 at 12:41 pm |
    • claybigsby

      you do realize the bible was written by a bunch of MEN right?

      October 28, 2011 at 12:46 pm |
  7. PCK

    The end DID come, but there was no one to take. There's always tomorrow.

    October 28, 2011 at 12:36 pm |
    • DP

      Just chock full of heathens.

      October 28, 2011 at 12:38 pm |
  8. Bill

    If they using the Bible, its hard hard to ignore the most direct answer in it by Jesus regarding the end of the world.

    Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.
    “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father."

    Matthew 24:35,36

    October 28, 2011 at 12:36 pm |
    • Mike

      Or you could look at what Jesus said in Mark 13:30 and Mathew 24:34 and conclude that Jesus returned in the first century... or there is a wandering guy or girl around 2000 years old that we haven't noticed.

      October 28, 2011 at 12:42 pm |
  9. SeanNJ

    Jesus can't be bothered to show up for work for even a single day in two thousand years? No wonder we're losing to the Chinese.

    October 28, 2011 at 12:34 pm |
    • ObamaJoe

      No,,he went to Beijing 10 years ago,,,,,,,,,,

      October 28, 2011 at 12:35 pm |
    • DP

      For the last time, Jesus isn't from New Jersey.

      October 28, 2011 at 12:39 pm |
  10. Stan N. Judgement

    So what is more arrogant? To feel that God has given you and you alone the ability to decode or discern his intentions (repeatedly) or to believe that the rapture did not happen on the premise that you and your followers were not included?

    October 28, 2011 at 12:34 pm |
  11. gaylord fokker jr.

    behold thy creation, I am going to end it soon, behold and repent

    October 28, 2011 at 12:34 pm |
    • Jake

      Nah -

      Your "rebuttal" of Observer is nonsense. The bottom line is, like it or not, the arguments for the existence of god presented by you do NOT have "powerful force." They have been shown to be invalid long ago. Even educated Christians admit this, which is why believers need to dodge the issue via "faith." I have given you some places to start with if you want to see that your arguments are invalid. Whether you care to understand and figure that out is up to you. But to make a long story short, you haven't proven anything, nor have you shifted the burden of proof onto the non-believers.

      October 28, 2011 at 12:59 pm |
  12. Nah

    reality: "Should I believe in a god whose existence cannot be proven and said god if he/she/it exists resides in an unproven, human-created, spirit state of bliss called heaven?????"

    You lost virtually all credibility with this statement. Why? Because if you knew anything about history or philosophy - or had an ounce of integrity - you'd admit that many "proofs" for the existence of a god exist. And virtually none of them are predicated on the Bible, but are based instead on logic, physics, causation, etc.

    You don't have to accept those proofs, but you do have the burden of showing how and why they're wrong. Hence, merely making categorical statements that "god's existence cannot be proven" and he resides in a "human created" heaven is not only unavailing, it's illogical and fallacious.

    October 28, 2011 at 12:34 pm |
    • EatYouAlive

      Please cite evidence or shut up

      October 28, 2011 at 12:39 pm |
    • Jake

      Nah -

      There are many "proofs" for the existence of God in philosophical circles. All have been discredited as invalid. To pretend otehrwise is intellectually dishonest, and shows that you are guided by your wishes and faith, not by reason. In any event, it seems clear that the person positing a magical, all-powerful, all-knowing, infinite sky fairy has the burden of proof, not the other way around.

      October 28, 2011 at 12:40 pm |
    • BobTheStaterOfObviousFacts
      October 28, 2011 at 12:41 pm |
    • Nah

      eat: "Please cite evidence or shut up"

      The most important thing about your response is the implicit admission that you don't know the history or philosophy behind the arguments for the existence of a god.

      Hence, you're unqualified to hold an opinion, or to make statements, about them.

      Isn't that cute?

      "Please cite evidence or shut up"

      Some of the evidence is derived from pure logic. The ontological argument proceeds from the clearly and distinctly "perceiving" the essence of a god, his "definition", and works towards his necessary existence in the world.

      Another is based on the physical and logical impossibility of an infinite regress of material causes, which concludes that a first cause must have existed. And that first cause must have been, by necessity, immaterial and outside of time.

      Another is based on the logical impossibility of something coming from nothing, etc. etc.

      Whether you accept the arguments is irrelevant. The fact that they exist puts the burden on you to refute them. Not to merely insult them or pretend they're not there.

      🙂

      October 28, 2011 at 12:46 pm |
    • Observer

      Nah,
      "Because if you knew anything about history or philosophy – or had an ounce of integrity – you'd admit that many "proofs" for the existence of a god exist"

      If you "had an ounce of integrity" you wouldn't use the word "proofs" when all you are talking about is "theories". There is no PROOF. Work on integrity.

      October 28, 2011 at 12:46 pm |
    • claybigsby

      Proofs? Citation needed.

      October 28, 2011 at 12:47 pm |
    • Nah

      jake: "All have been discredited as invalid."

      Brilliant rebuttal. A conclusory statement with no facts or arguments.

      "To pretend otehrwise is intellectually dishonest, and shows that you are guided by your wishes and faith, not by reason."

      Nah. To pretend that they've been discredited - merely because you're an atheist - shows the shallow depths of your own intelligence. Anyone with any intellectual honesty would recognize that the arguments have tremendous force, even if the objections to them have force as well.

      "In any event, it seems clear that the person positing a magical, all-powerful, all-knowing, infinite sky fairy has the burden of proof, not the other way around."

      Not really.

      The burden is on whoever makes an assertion. If someone says a god exists, he must prove it. But once he does, the burden shifts to his opposition to disprove it. You cannot sit there and merely say that he's "wrong".

      October 28, 2011 at 12:49 pm |
    • Jake

      Nah – the fact that you belive the arguments you paraphrase are valid – and generally accepted as so – is hilarious. What color is the sky in your world. One of the first things you do in a good philosophy course focusing on logic and reasoning is go through the myriad of supposed "proofs" for the the existence of god and discover how they are invalid and do not work. For starters, you shold familiarize yourself with the ad hoc fallacy. You should also consider why an infinite CAUSAL regress is any less tenable to the notion that we exist as caused by something the non-physical – i.e., your "god" – a type of causation we NEVER see in day to day life and which you assume the existence of just to make your argument "work."

      October 28, 2011 at 12:52 pm |
    • Nah

      observer: "If you "had an ounce of integrity" you wouldn't use the word "proofs" when all you are talking about is "theories". There is no PROOF. Work on integrity."

      Another brilliant rebuttal by a CNN intellectual.

      How and why is there no "PROOF"? Why are they merely "THEORIES"?

      Proof comes in two forms: data and necessity. One is based on experience, the other on logic. Math falls into the second category. For instance, you don't need to see two apples put next to another two apples to know that there would be "four" apples put together.

      Parallax falls into the first and second: based on experience we know that the shift between two objects when moving from side to side can be used to find how far away they are. Hence, based on the shifts between stars while the earth revolves around the sun, we can tell how far away the stars are without ever actually measuring the distance ourselves. Why? Because the stars "must" be a certain distance given a certain parallax.

      The arguments for the existence of a god use one or both of those methods. Either on pure logic (ontological) or on a mix of logic and what we know from physics (cosmological).

      Good job?

      October 28, 2011 at 12:53 pm |
    • Observer

      Nah,

      Your response said nothing to show you even understand the difference between common words like "proof"' and "theory".

      October 28, 2011 at 12:59 pm |
    • Nah

      jake: "Nah – the fact that you belive the arguments you paraphrase are valid – and generally accepted as so – is hilarious."

      Please prove them wrong.

      Your responses seem to show more that you're dogmatically anti-religious than open minded or intelligent.

      "One of the first things you do in a good philosophy course focusing on logic and reasoning is go through the myriad of supposed "proofs" for the the existence of god and discover how they are invalid and do not work."

      Not really. You focus on the arguments for and against the existence of a god, but because there is no clear winner each way, it's dishonest to say - or genuinely believe - that the objections to the proofs "disprove" the arguments.

      "For starters, you shold familiarize yourself with the ad hoc fallacy."

      I'm afraid you don't know what "ad hoc" means. It means coming up with a solution to fix a problem on the spot, for a particular purpose, and without regard to the arguments effects on the rest of the argument, etc.

      "You should also consider why an infinite CAUSAL regress is any less tenable to the notion that we exist as caused by something the non-physical – i.e., your "god" – a type of causation we NEVER see in day to day life and which you assume the existence of just to make your argument "work.""

      First, who said I believe in a god?

      Second, the argument is based, once again, on the logical and physical impossibility of an infinite regress of material causes. That means, by necessity, there was a first cause. What people generally do is extrapolate from the argument the fact that the first cause had to be, therefore, immaterial. They call that thing "god".

      The infinite regress of material causes is "untenable" simply because it defies both logic and physics. Whether you've ever "seen" an immaterial cause is irrelevant to the question.

      I'm sorry you can't understand that.

      October 28, 2011 at 12:59 pm |
    • Jake

      Nah –

      Your "rebuttal" of Observer is nonsense. The bottom line is, like it or not, the arguments for the existence of god presented by you do NOT have "powerful force." They have been shown to be invalid long ago. Even educated Christians admit this, which is why believers need to dodge the issue via "faith." I have given you some places to start with if you want to see that your arguments are invalid. Whether you care to understand and figure that out is up to you. But to make a long story short, you haven't proven anything, nor have you shifted the burden of proof onto the non-believers.

      October 28, 2011 at 12:59 pm |
    • Nah

      observer: "Your response said nothing to show you even understand the difference between common words like "proof"' and "theory"."

      *yawn*

      Troll harder?

      October 28, 2011 at 12:59 pm |
    • Nah

      jake: "Your "rebuttal" of Observer is nonsense. The bottom line is, like it or not, the arguments for the existence of god presented by you do NOT have "powerful force." They have been shown to be invalid long ago."

      Once again you respond with a conclusory statement that's devoid of all substance.

      Does this really count as "deep thinking" for you?

      "I have given you some places to start with if you want to see that your arguments are invalid."

      And I've shown you how and why your objections aren't necessarily true, valid, or even persuasive. Please respond to those.

      "But to make a long story short, you haven't proven anything, nor have you shifted the burden of proof onto the non-believers."

      First, conclusory statements are not proof of fact, once again.

      Second, the burden shifts in every argument, no matter how ridiculous you think the arguments are. When someone asserts that X is true and gives arguments for that proposition, it's not enough for you to just sit there and say "No. Nope. You're wrong." and believe that you've thereby refuted them. The burden is on you to show how and why they're wrong.

      October 28, 2011 at 1:03 pm |
    • Observer

      Nah,
      "Another is based on the physical and logical impossibility of an infinite regress of material causes, which concludes that a first cause must have existed. And that first cause must have been, by necessity, immaterial and outside of time."

      This is the best you can come up with to prove God exists? If you accept that an infinite regression cannot occur, it certainly doesn't PROVE the existence of God. Again, you don't begin to understand the difference between a theory and proof. The infinite regression argument offers just as much "proof" of God as it does of everything starting from a committee of zombies.

      GUESS again. Try to work on integrity. That seems to be another word where you don't know the definition.

      October 28, 2011 at 1:12 pm |
    • Answer

      @Nah

      Ahh the guy who only writes back in one-liner responses. Glad to see that morons never change.
      When you here you're here to win – right? A poor tool who has no real facts wants to show off his new lessons from the book of "how to win arguments." How uninteresting.

      October 28, 2011 at 4:39 pm |
  13. andy

    god please save us from your followers!

    October 28, 2011 at 12:33 pm |
    • ObamaJoe

      Who knows who they are following,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

      October 28, 2011 at 12:35 pm |
  14. Kymscribler

    Try it before you knock it. I promise youll find something unexpected.

    October 28, 2011 at 12:33 pm |
    • claybigsby

      Try free thinking and i promise you will find enlightenment

      October 28, 2011 at 12:48 pm |
  15. ObamaJoe

    so hard to understand that,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    October 28, 2011 at 12:33 pm |
  16. Paul

    oh and BTW: yes athiest.. your parents were as crappy as can be and I'm sure as you were raised you came out slightly less intelligent then them. You have no idea of family, love, etc.. so I feel very sorry for you. God isnt just about whats after life its about a way of life and how to live yours to the fullest. Plus anybody that does not have faith would be a horrible person to be around because we would have to listen to your negativity. reply and try to counter what i said lol fact is you are a dimwit and I wont read it 😉 have a nice life DB's

    October 28, 2011 at 12:32 pm |
    • EatYouAlive

      how christian of you. lol

      October 28, 2011 at 12:40 pm |
    • GoodPerson

      Wow..are you for real??? You are saying that if I don't have faith, I am a horrible, negative person and terrible to be around?? Just a bit judgmental aren't you? My parents are loving, caring, deeply faithful Christians. I was raised in the church. However, I do not have such strong beliefs and that is not my parents fault. However, I am a happy, optimistic, spiritual person. If you are an example of God's faithful, then count me out.

      October 28, 2011 at 12:40 pm |
    • QWANCHILEW

      Aliens altered our DNA and put us here. Aliens played God to us. Jesus was an alien. You will see. TPTB will not tell us the truth because people like you wouldn't be able to handle it.

      October 28, 2011 at 12:43 pm |
    • RAWoD

      Paul, please treat your religion as you would your man hood - be proud of it if you want but PLEASE don't pull it out in public.

      October 28, 2011 at 12:45 pm |
    • claybigsby

      actually paul...i think your parents were terrible allowing the church to brainwash you at such an early age.

      October 28, 2011 at 12:49 pm |
    • someGuy

      anybody who doesn't have faith would be horrible to be around? You know in my life some of the worst people to be around were religious types. Saying and thinking things exactly like this, self-righteous, overzealous and working ridiculously hard to keep their view of reality from being shattered and as a result constantly feeding bs like this to those around them. Eat me.

      October 28, 2011 at 12:50 pm |
    • HellBent

      Somebody need to venture out of their parents' basement every once in a while. Anger issues much? wow.

      October 28, 2011 at 12:52 pm |
    • IsThereADog?

      Wow, Paul. There are so many things wrong with what you wrote that it is hard to craft a reply, but here goes:

      1. How is being Christian/religious a prerequisite to understanding love or family? I am agnostic/atheist and happen to have fulfilling relationships with those I love. The bible has some horrible examples of how "believers" treat their families.

      2. You say God "is about a way of life and how to live yours to the fullest." I would argue that this would be more true of a nonbeliever. Because I do not believe that there is anything after this life, I am not praying for end times so I can go sit on a cloud and take harp lessons from a unicorn (I think that's in the bible somewhere)

      3. Nonbelievers are not necessarily negative people. I wouldn't (and I don't think my family, friends, or co-workers) consider myself negative.

      The fact is, not believing in your Judeo-Christian god is just one of the many gods I don't believe in–I assume you don't believe in Apollo or Zeus or Thor (though I hear he makes a good movie)–I have just gone slightly further and rejected belief in the god of your choice.
      Feel free to believe what you wish, but save your "pity" for the rational people of the world–we are doing just fine.

      October 28, 2011 at 1:01 pm |
  17. nik green

    Camping is no Christian.... He's a fraud, a confidence trickster and a charlatan. He has bilked thousands of people out of their savings by playing on their naive beliefs and irrational fears. In short, he is indulging in "spiritual blackmail". Where's the FBI when you need them?

    October 28, 2011 at 12:32 pm |
  18. Your Panties Inna Wad

    I heard about this weird group on TV. I'm glad they gave up on it. It was getting really annoying.

    October 28, 2011 at 12:32 pm |
  19. ObamaJoe

    This is very un-America..............................................

    October 28, 2011 at 12:31 pm |
  20. A. Anderson

    As a follower of Christ, I know that it was never our duty to "predict" the end times... only to be aware of them and "TRY" to live my life in accordance with his teachings. Whether I am "raptured up" our "left behind"... my only duty is to the one true GOD and follow his sons teachings.

    October 28, 2011 at 12:31 pm |
    • claybigsby

      "my only duty is to the one true GOD and follow his sons teachings."

      how do you KNOW your god is the one true god? cuz the men who wrote the bible said so? bahahahahahaha. Men influenced by god....according to men. Religion is cyclical

      October 28, 2011 at 12:50 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.