One of the things that always puzzled me about the Witnesses' doctrine was this idea that we are living in the worst time the world has ever seen - that the twentieth century has surpassed all others in death and destruction. Am I only the only crazy fool who thinks we have it pretty good?
A hundred years ago, people died from diseases that are easily treated today. We have vaccinations that are unique to the 20th century. We have technologies that improve our quality of life when we are ill and injured - surgeries that can remobilize the paralyzed - and drugs that can put even the deadliest viruses at bay.
Earthquakes... I'm not an expert, but I know Witnesses tout that earthquakes have gotten worse in the past hundred years. Is that totally accurate? Not by my research. The deadliest earthquake was in 1556 in China - 850,000 perished. Other big ones... Syria in the 1100s and two in Iran in the 800s... these killed more than the deadliest of the 20th century. What is the foundation of this earthquake terror?
Crime is bad - but it's getting better. Crime rates continue to go down in the US (even though the TV news would have you believe we are all dying in the streets... overdramatization at its best).
I'm not saying the world is perfect - believe me. I have family in Africa right now working with children orphaned by AIDS. I know. But to say that the trouble of the 20th century (and now, 21st) is so unique and so unprecedented.... that sounds absurd to me. There has always been war, disease, hunger, and hatred. Why is it so special now?
So my question is - how do Witnesses ignore history? How can they say it's all unique and so much worse?
SLM