Editing Openai/68212884-5940-8007-ae13-ab8952298d9e (section)

=== Looking at prophetic literature and systemic models of history, the Second Coming has no clear supporting pattern.  Biblical and extra-biblical prophecies about the end have been interpreted endlessly, yet history provides no definitive signpost.  Wikipedia notes that “many specific dates have been predicted” for Christ’s returnen.wikipedia.org<ref>{{cite web|title=en.wikipedia.org|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Coming#:~:text=Views%20about%20the%20nature%20of,have%20been%20predicted%20for%20the|publisher=en.wikipedia.org|access-date=2025-12-07}}</ref> — from early church vagueness to the Millerites, Jehovah’s Witnesses (1914), and countless others — and all have failed.  Each failure has been explained away (false prophets, spiritual fulfillment, wrong calendar, etc.), but such ad hoc adjustments undermine the idea of a reliable prophetic pattern. ===

From a systems-theory perspective, a cosmic “event” like Christ’s return would entail a radical discontinuity: instant resurrection of believers, final judgment, transformation of nature, etc.  No physical or sociological theory anticipates such a break.  (For example, physics models of the universe do not include divine interventions.)  We can note that apocalyptic expectations often rise in correlation with crises (wars, plagues), but none of these crises have verifiably produced a second advent.  In fact, professional futurology and world-systems analysis focus on gradual change, not instantaneous supernatural climax.

It is telling that no model of historical development or universal “pattern of progress” necessitates a messianic finale.  Some philosophers (e.g. Kant) argue moral law implies a just outcome eventually, but they stop short of predicting Christ.  In practice, global moral “progress” has been uneven, not trending inevitably to utopia, and many would argue it even regresses.  Thus the idea of Jesus returning as a tidy resolution is not required by any demonstrated universal moral logic — it is a moral hope, not an analytical conclusion.