Response to Benny's blog post “Which Apocalypse Would You Prefer?”

Benny's original blog post can be found here:
http://whatispopculture.blogspot.com/2011/04/which-apocalypse-would-you-prefer.html


I think that the easier apocalypse would be the first. If my fate were in the hands of a higher being, then I would not have to really do much. I won’t say I’m righteous, but whether I am or not is the only thing that appears to be important. In the moment of the rapture, I would not suddenly be able to change myself into being a righteous person. The chance that I am not going to be taken is almost equal to the chance that I will be affected by a looming crisis and will not survive in the second option. (This I deduce by probabilistic inductive logic). Therefore the chance that I am going to be stuck in a battle and suffer hardships is pretty much the same. 

I would like to point out that both options include the probability of a savior who will come to save this world, whether they are already in it or not. Now the first points to Jesus Christ, and the second points to an unknown savior. Another reason I think I’d prefer the first evangelical apocalypse is because of the known saviour. History has indeed shown us a man named Jesus Christ did indeed exist, and it has been proclaimed that he has done many great things. However, the second option could be anyone, or even no one. I’d much rather take my chance with the reality of a saviour than an apocalypse where the end is much more unclear. 

Crises facing humanity are not always easily resolved, nor do they always end well. And I definitely agree with what your problem with Oswalt’s reading for the week. You also used a great example of the zombies to prove your point.