 |
. HOME
.
|
SUBJECT: Antichrist is Satan?
Dear Message Board Participants:
It appears the deceiver of the whole world has a few of you hoodwinked. He
pulled Christian wool over your innocent eyes while you slept.
He would have some believe that Antichrist is not a man. "Antichrist
is Satan" is his false prophecy.
The interpretation of the prophecies are becoming more inane by the minute.....if
that is possible.
Andrew goes to excruciating lengths to 'prove' his anti-biblical thesis that
Antichrist is really a pseudonym for Satan, only to have Raphael undo him
by quoting one Scripture: Rev. 20:10.
Laura was equally brilliant in quickly finding black holes of contradiction
in Andrew's theological universe.
The spirit of confusion surrounding the prophecies is not of God. Our Lord
has always had in His Body prophets and teachers to give understanding of
His prophetic Word. These prophets and teachers have all agreed on the ultimate
interpretation and identification of the Antichrist. Luther, Calvin, Edwards
and Spurgeon may be counted among them, to Andrew's dismay.
Though professing orthodox Reformation Protestantism, Andrew opposes the greatest
Reformed men of God who have ever walked the earth. I have posted two such
giants' theses On the Antichrist - Turretin and Whitaker - on our website
under "Works." We have translated and published their scholarly
Latin theses into English for the first time in history.
Furthermore, I have posted rare Treatises On the Antichrist written by the
ancient Waldenses and Lollards which point directly to the Papacy.
One must deliberately snub one's nose at all these anointed Christian witnesses,
along with their well-reasoned proofs, to believe Andrew's Preterist fables.
Preterism has its origins with the Jesuit Alcazar, circa A. D. 1609. Cardinal
Bousset carried the Preterist torch into the 18th century, where the German
school of apostate Higher Criticism embraced it as their own. Alleged Protestants
who hold to their false theory are holding to Jesuitical lies.
Jesus promises that despite the unprecedented deception perpetrated by the
false Christs [read: Antichrist officeholders] and false prophets, it is virtually
impossible for the Elect to remain deceived, (Matt. 24:24). Ergo, those who
remain deceived are not Elect.
To not recognize the Man of Sin, whose coming is after the working of Satan
--- (notice the Man of Sin is differentiated from Satan. They are not one
and the same persons) --- is to manifest a spirit of strong delusion sent
by the Lord God Himself to the purpose that such unbelievers might be eternally
damned.
Thus, the subject of the Man of Sin, aka the Antichrist, aka the Beast, is
not a side or peripheral biblical issue. Indeed, it is so essential a doctrine
that those who rise in the first resurrection are deemed holy and blessed
for not obeying the Beast, aka the Antichrist. These martyrs knew his identity,
they exposed him to the world, they were believed by the Elect, they were
killed for their witness.
To summarily dismiss the teachings of the Reformers, as well as the united
testimony of the martyrs is to show no love for the brethren, another sign
of reprobation, (1 John 2:10.) To disbelieve the brethren in so key a point
is to call them liars, or deluded or deceived. It also exhibits a spirit of
pride --- your wisdom is greater than all who came before you --- is no fruit
of the Spirit.
To disregard the overwhelming testimony of history is to display arrogant
disdain for the decrees of God and their fulfillment in Bible prophecy. Ignorance
is not bliss. Willful ignorance is proof of a sovereign blinding and deafening
upon the one who remains dumbfounded.
"None of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand."
"Seeing they see not, and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand."
"Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear [read: understand] the
words of this prophecy, and keep [read: believe and teach others] those things
which are written therein: for the time is at hand."
Rand Winburn
Director
Protestant Reformation Publications
(11/26/01)
P. S. Andrew could not refute my articles, Mark of the Beast. Am I the only one who noticed?
______________________________________________________
SUBJECT: To all
Nina, do not let yourself become
confused. Questions are only valid in light of the proper interpretative method.
Laura
You ask: <<Do you see any contradictions in these two quotes from your
post?: "Whenever we go outside the Bible to try to gain understanding
of the Bible we will always hit a dead end." "This is the way Luther
believed, Calvin, Jonathan Edwards, Spurgeon and other great reformed biblical
teachers all followed.">>
Don’t be silly me lady. I said that these men followed the ethos, I did not
say that they provided the interpretations from their own minds. It is the
premillennial writers who routinely make things up and it is premillennialists
who routinely cite these writers.
Come come now!
Raphael:
I did not say that the “beast of Revelation 13” was the antichrist and nowhere
in scripture will you see that. I said that the antichrist of the John epistles
was Satan. The term only appears on John epistles. It is the premillennialists,
in defense of the erroneous doctrine, who state that the beast of Revelation
13 is this myst4ery superhuman being called the “antichrist”, not scripture
itself.
The dragon is Satan, the “beast” is the pagan state and the false prophet
is the false church.
Rand,
I admit that I have not read your post. When I read it I will reply.
But I may have to get out my, what is it called… really thick word book? You
know the one Noah wrote on the ark. You use a lot of three syllable words
(you know big ones like mayonnaise) and me being from Georgia and all have
a hard time figuring it all out.
David,
A reformer is one who does simply that. They reform doctrine which is false.
They were called protestants because they did simply that- protested the excesses
and false teachings of the Roman Church.
The battle did not end with Catholicism. The true Doctrines of Grace have
been under attack ever since Luther from remonstrators and modern evangelicals
and such other doctrines such as premillennialism and dispensationalism are
children of that Arminian error. They do not hold essential doctrines such
as the of the sovereignty of God, eternal election or the eternal covenant
and therefore these other theories are borne from this bad fruit.
Yes you should make up your own mind but
the Spirit must be your guide. If any doctrine is contrary in any way with
the Doctrines if Grace then they are wrong, and that is what you must keep
in mind.
Dispensationalism and premillenialism are not consistent with the Doctrines
of Grace. Explore it and you will see.
Signed,
Andrew (11/26/01)
____________________________________________________
Rand,
I just wanted to comment on your post quickly, even though I am SO staying
out of this.
I just wanted to say that if I am understanding you correctly, you are accusing
Andrew of being a reprobate and of not having the fruit of the Spirit. It
appears as though you are questioning his salvation. I could be misunderstanding
you and if so, I apologize and ask you to forgive me. I, unlike Andrew, really
don't understand things sometimes. LOL
If I am understanding you correctly, then I must say in defense of my brother
Andrew that he is indeed NOT what you believe him to be and he actually is
a very dear brother in Christ when you are not debating him (he gets feisty
- much like you do. )
Anyway, I can sit back and watch people who are debating when they call each
other things like arrogant and ignorant and just plain wrong - but when we
get to the point of questioning another's salvation I get kinda defensive.
I hope you stick around, Rand. I like you.
What girl wouldn't like a guy who said she was brilliant?
Signed,
Laura (11/26/01)
____________________________________________________
I am glad to have so many serious students of God's word on this thread. I am speaking of Marlane, Laura, Andrew, Nina, Raphael, Rand...all of us. I hope we can use this discussion to come to Truth, and a deeper understanding.
Signed,
Warrior728 (11/26/01)
____________________________________________________
SUBJECT: Guys
Guys,
We are all just a bunch of people having an intelligent discussion right?
Let’s remember that we are all friends and yes we should and yes I expect
you all to passionately defend your beliefs. I will but it in no way means
I do not love each of you like the brothers and sisters you are.
The pursuit of truth is the ultimate goal. I believe that in order to do that
you have to pinch your beliefs until they scream. That is what we are doing
here I hope.
Laura do not worry about Rand. He is like a more refined version of Bear.
He does have an agenda, which is to promote his web site, which centers on
anti-Catholicism. It is like a sickness with some people it actually can become
quite binding when hatred of any one particular thing is your sole raison
détre (ohhh a big word from a sophisticated red neck).
But I do encourage him to post and to post often. I do not take offence but
consider it a form of flattery.
As far as picking on premillennialists, I admit it is just a form of hyperbole
to illustrate a general point, and that is that the interpretations come from
outside scripture itself. Also it is just fun and I was trying to get your’s
and Marlane’s goat. Mission accomplished.
Raphael I do have answers for you but cannot get to it just now. It is deep
amillennial stuff baby.
Signed,
Andrew (11/27/01)
___________________________________________________
Before I get to both Rand and Raphael
I wanted to close a few loops around here. I actually meant to say some of
this last time.
David: I do not believe that if one believes in a personal AC that he is going
against reformed theology. Clearly there are many reformers who DO believe
in a literal AC. There are also many who believe in an Israeli national conversion.
They are split on some of the details. Almost NONE of them believe in the
pre millennial rapture though. If they did, I would be very suspicious.
In its essence, premillennialism rubs against the grain of reformed theology.
So if it ends up that you believe it- so be it. I personally do not.
Nina: I am a partial preterist. I believe that the destruction of Israel is
a type or shadow of the final judgment. That is why when Jesus spoke about
the destruction of Jerusalem, he also laced in comments about the final judgment.
Laura: I do not follow anything any man says. If a man is spirit led to interpret
scripture it is the spirit using that man to convey a message. When what a
man says holds up in light of scripture it is good and it is from the spirit.
Some men are and many are not. Hint: Jack Van Impe is not.
Signed,
Andrew (11/27/01)
___________________________________________________
SUBJECT: Rand
Rand you are such a dip stick. I
just read your last post. First of all let me state emphatically that I would
be ashamed to call you a brother in the spirit of reformation. Your web page
is nothing but an anti-catholic web page. You use the reformation as a vehicle
for your bigotry and that is a crying shame. You give real Protestants a bad
name.
Like I said earlier, you are just a sophisticated bear.
Now to your text proofing. You say that the AC cannot be Satan and allude
to 2 Th 2:8-9 as you “proof”. I believe you put it this way:
<<To not recognize the Man of Sin, whose coming is after the working
of Satan --- (notice the Man of Sin is differentiated from Satan. They are
not one and the same persons) --- is to manifest a spirit of strong delusion
sent by the Lord God Himself to the purpose that such unbelievers might be
eternally damned.>>
Son, what makes you think that? Read the
verses (and put away your NIV):
2 Th 2:8-9 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume
with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his
coming: {9} whose coming is against the working of Satan with all power and
signs and lying wonders,
It is Christ Jesus who is “…against the working of Satan…” Read it in the
original text and you will clearly see that the pronoun “whose” modifies “Lord”
and the phrase “…with all power and signs and lying wonders” refers to Satan.
Again you are the educated one. So maybe I am overstepping my boundaries here.
Signed,
Andrew (11/27/01)
___________________________________________________
Glad to hear you're a partial and not full preterist, Andrew. From what I read, they are way off in left field!
Signed,
Nina (11/27/01)
___________________________________________________
SUBJECT: False Teachers
7 Characteristics of false Teachers
False teachers strive to please others.
<<Laura was equally brilliant in quickly finding black holes of contradiction
in Andrew's theological universe.>>
False teachers cast dirt, scorn, and reproach upon Christ's faithful ambassadors.
<<Andrew opposes the greatest Reformed men of God who have ever walked
the earth.>>
<<The interpretation of the prophecies are becoming more inane by the
minute.....if that is possible.>>
False teachers are venters of the devices and visions of their own heads and
hearts.
<<Furthermore, I have posted rare Treatises On the Antichrist written
by the ancient Waldenses and Lollards which point directly to the Papacy.>>
False teachers easily pass over the great and weighty things both of law and
gospel, and stand most upon those things that are of the least concern to
the souls of men.
<<Andrew could not refute my articles, Mark of the Beast. Am I the only
one who noticed?>>
False teachers cover and color their dangerous principles very fair speeches
and plausible pretenses, and golden expressions.
<<To disbelieve the brethren in so key a point is to call them liars,
or deluded or deceived. It also exhibits a spirit of pride --- your wisdom
is greater than all who came before you --- is no fruit of the Spirit.>>
False teachers strive more to win over men to their opinions, than to better
them in their conversations.
<<Dear Message Board Participants: It appears the deceiver of the whole
world has a few of you hoodwinked.>>
False teachers seek to profit from their followers.
www.iconbusters.com
Signed,
Andrew (11/27/01)
_________________________________________________
SUBJECT: Andrew & his Bible
Dear Message Board Participants:
Andrew's debating skills underwhelm me. Yawn.
Frankly, I am surprised at his last few posts. They reveal his fear, sheer
terror and unrestrained panic. A stranger has entered into the hallowed playground
of his favorite messageboard where he has reigned as king. This stranger is
now calling him to account.
I ask the participants of this board to note that Andrew uses not one substantive
fact to back up his vacuous assertions. For example:
"David: I do not believe that if one believes in a personal AC that he
is going against reformed theology. Clearly there are many reformers who DO
believe in a literal AC. There are also many who believe in an Israeli national
conversion. They are split on some of the details. Almost NONE of them believe
in the pre millennial rapture though. If they did, I would be very suspicious."
Andrew gives no names, nor quotes, or sources for his quotes. Had you folks
asked for specifics in his assertions his reign on this board would have been
short-lived.
Here is another gem from the windmills of Andrew's mind:
"Laura: I do not follow anything any man says. If a man is spirit led
to interpret scripture it is the spirit using that man to convey a message.
When what a man says holds up in light of scripture it is good and it is from
the spirit. Some men are and many are not. Hint: Jack Van Impe is not."
Andrew would have you believe the Spirit is leading him into lying Jesuitical
Preterism. The Spirit is certainly not leading him into orthodox Reformed
prophetic teaching. How can that be, Laura? Did not Jesus promise the Spirit
would lead His people into all truth? If Andrew is one of His, has he obviated
the power of God to teach him?
Andrew follows no man. Despite the clear teaching of Scripture that the Body
of Christ contains many members - apostles, prophets, teachers, pastors, evangelists,
etc., Andrew needs no other member. He has his Bible. He has no need to read,
for himself, studying and meditating upon the writings of God's anointed.
Andrew has his Bible. He has no need to humble himself at the feet of courageous
geniuses such as Luther, Calvin, Turretin, Fulke, Whitaker, Bale, Foxe, Tyndale,
Barnes, Frith, Bilney, etc., etc. Andrew has his Bible.
Laura, the Scriptures I quoted demand discernment as to the nature of the
wheat and the tare. God has made a distinction. FYI, there are others. Perhaps
next time I will elaborate. The Lord has called us to separation, not fornication.
His guidelines aid in our sanctification, if we will believe and obey.
Raphael once again proves himself a man of rare common sense. His reasoned
argument against Andrew's false Preterist doctrine by virtue of the chronological
order of the judgment of Satan, the Beast and false prophet is the stuff discerning
Christians are made of <smile> Kudos!
Rand Winburn
Director
Protestant Reformation Publications
(11/27/01)
_________________________________________________
SUBJECT: Re: Andrew & his Bible
Andrew has been reigning as King
here?
Seriously, I see both of you guys talking back and forth like bigshots on
the playground. Let's be charitable amongst each other here. I know for a fact both Rand
and Andrew believe what they are saying is the truth.
I also believe both Rand and Andrew are brothers in Christ, though obviously
both have some weeds in their theological garden (I am very anti-Catholicism,
but some of the stuff on Rand's website is probably on the fringe. I will
have to look at it), as do we all. Some more than others, of course.
Signed,
Warrior728
_________________________________________________
SUBJECT: Hail Caesar!
Rand, you are a joker. My skills
are so underwhelming to you that you are now obsessed with me. Really, as
I said before, I find it flattering. I have to warn you upfront though that
I am already spoken for. Even if I weren’t I do not think I could accept this
early in the season. I’m just teasing you friend. Do not get your panties
in a wad or anything. We all take a turn in the barrel.
Rand, I am not scared of anything. You are welcome here. If the Internet disappeared
tomorrow it is not I who would be panicking but the many people such as Mike
Corthell, Bear and you whom I have encountered over the past few years whose
lives seem to revolve around it. The only people whose opinions I care about
are those of my family and I have no fear there. MY children believe that
I hung the stars and the moon and my wife adores me. So I guess what I am
saying is that if you want to be the debate king or whatever- you are welcome
to it. Really, it is no skin of my nose. I go home every night and never give
you a second thought. You, on the other hand have a very unhealthy obsession
towards me.
I would love to debate anything with
you but frankly you are hard to follow. You cannot stick to one point for
very long and revert to personal attacks frequently. If you want to discuss
something then stick to a particular train of thought. I will be happy to
entertain you.
I do not believe you are such a bad guy Rand- just a joker. Please post and
post often I love reading you. I will never be offended by anything you have
to say.
Signed,
Andrew (11/28/01)
_________________________________________________
Raphael :
You asked: <<Now you also believe the 1,000 years that satan was imprisoned
happened in the past, and he is presently loose, correct?>>
In Revelation 20 we find Satan being bound and locked up for a period of 1000
years. This occurred at the cross. Satan was bound by the victory of Christ
on the cross. He had to be bound so that Christ could build His Church by
releasing those whom Satan held captive.
Jesus said: "How can one enter into a strong man's house and spoil his
goods, except he first Bind the strong man and then he will spoil his house."
Matthew 12:29
These are those held in bondage, which Christ came to set free. Satan is the
great deceiver of the world and he held the people in bondage to him so that
they were his slaves.
When Jesus cast out Demons the Jews said that he was casting out devils by
the power of Satan. Jesus replied “A Kingdom divided against itself cannot
stand and that if He casts out Devils by the Spirit of God, then the Kingdom
of God has come unto them.
This is what Revelation 20 is all about. Jesus comes and binds Satan. His
kingdom is among us. Isaiah the Prophet spoke of a time when the Gentiles
(nations) would come into the kingdom of God when the Messiah come to free
the captivity (Isaiah 9:1; 42:6; 49:2,22). Captivity here is specific to Satan’s
desire to keep the Church from being built.
The question is often asked, "but why is Satan loosed a little season
in the future?" It's because this loosing is a prelude to the second
advent of Christ and rapture of His Church. At this set time God judges the
unfaithful Church by the release of Satan.
So to answer your question directly: Satan was bound at the cross and will
be loosed when those who are to be sealed of the nations have been sealed
in their foreheads. The Purpose is clearly that God keep him bound till the
appointed time after the testimony of the saints is finished and all Israel
is saved.
You then go on to ask:
<<We can see in scripture that that Satan's demise-being thrown into
the lake of fire-happens after this 1,000 year period,(Rev. 20:10), but the
beast and false prophet are thrown in the lake of fire BEFORE the 1,000 year
period (Rev. 19:20).>>
Revelation is not chronological Raphael. IF it were you would have several
judgment days and several returns of the lord since they are each described
more than once.
Chapter Nineteen begins with communion, the joyful wedding feast of Christ
and His Bride, the Church and ends with the army of saints victorious in His
Word, which proceeds from His mouth like a sword and destroys evil (The Last
Judgment). Chapter Twenty gives a capsulated history of the new covenant from
the first coming of Christ until the end of the world (The Last Judgment).
They both end in the same place.
<<Therefore it must be your opinion that "the beast," being
the pagan state, and "the false prophet", being the false church,
are already in the lake of fire......We can see in this present world, that
it just ain't so.....>>
You see that it is not that way at all. The Dragon, Beast and False Church
are all judged on the final day.
Signed,
Andrew (11/28/01)
|