So I can be clear, are stated that the end of the world is not scriptural,
The first question is loaded in that we must clarify the meaning of "the end of the world" which has so many connotations for each religion. The end of this system of things is taught by Jehovah's Witnesses. Why they don't just refer to "this system" without the qualifier has always stumped me. This system of things is really meant by JWs to describe -- and correct me if I'm mistaken -- the present system of government and its materialistic infrastructure and therefore, the world "things" qualifies "this system" as connecting and intermingling politics and laws to taxpayer funded infrastructure in all forms. Thus "this system of things" is the driving force of this present world's influence on those practicing Christianity, because it requires citizens to adhere to government laws and requirements in order to legally have free use of the nation's physical infrastructure and resources. This creates a system that subtly influences and tempts Christians to veer away from pure Christian ideology, tenets and ethics. In little ways, Christians are asked to subtly compromise their beliefs in order to satisfy the requirements of being a good citizen of the State. Perfectly ethical conduct that is approved by God is intermingled with nationalistic requirements, especially in times of war, in order for Christians to keep from breaking "Caesar's laws" and it is increasingly difficult to fully serve God and "Caesar" (the government and its authorized institutions). Of course the Christian cannot serve two masters the Bible tells us, but in seeking to serve God we are instructed in the book of Romans to obey the authorities. However, other parts of the Bible clearly warn that our obedience to the authorities is not without question, and that we cannot obey the government if it tells us to violate God's laws.
The end of this planet either as a whole or the wiping out of its surface area through fire, nuclear conflagration, massive volcanic activity or atmospheric disturbances is "the end of the world" for many born again Christians and others in the evangelical Christian movements. However, the Bible on several occasions states that the Earth will last forever. This is not a sarcastic statement with a hidden meaning such as the actual mass of this planet will last forever while the entire surface area is destroyed. However, the book of Revelation seems to contradict other areas of the Bible in the implication of Earth's destruction, and a full study of the Bible as a whole is required to understand the context and symbolism specific to Revelation.
or that LaHaye's (the Dispensational view) is not biblical?
The "left behind" concept is based on scriptures that are, IMO, wrenched out of context. The movies raise more problems and contradictions than they solve. One born again Christian, some time ago, explained to me that God (who they claim is Christ himself) will rapture faithful Christians into Heaven, test those who aren't faithful enough by leaving them behind to get one last chance to prove their faithfulness to God, take those left behind through a grueling process of tribulation and worldwide destruction, create a literal new Earth (new surface area or new planet down to the core was not specified), then materialize the raptured Christians in Heaven back to Earth's surface to restore the planet to paradise over 1,000 years. Then after the 1,000 years, Earth would permanently get wiped out (I presume down to the core, so nothing was left, kind of like what happened to Alderon in the first Star Wars), and Christians would return to Heaven. Why the interim 1,000 years? I didn't get a clear answer. Perhaps a born again Christian in the house can explain the whole thing -- tribulation to end of 1,000 year reign of Christ -- for those like myself who just don't get it?
Derrick