Beginning of Wisdom (Torah Club) lesson #26: End Times speculation based on Young Earth Creationism combined with the Epistle of Barnabas

 

Building an End Times chronology on the pseudepigraphal (i.e. the Apostle Barnabas had nothing to do with writing it so it lacks any genuine authority) Epistle of Barnabas.

Predicting that we are about to be in the last 1/7th of God's redemptive program based on the combination of Young Earth Creationism (i.e. the Earth is 6,000 years old) and the Epistle of Barnabas.

Using brackets, {In the Messianic Era} and {In the World to Come} to change the meaning of the book of Hebrews away from its intended target of comforting the Church today.

Admitting the truth about Acts 15, this flatly contradicts what Lancaster wrote in Restoration and FFOZ's belief that the Jerusalem Council imposed the Law of Moses on Gentile believers by "assuming" they would be taught it in the synagogues (Where, as Acts makes painfully clear, they were not welcome).

I know a lot of pastors and committed Christians, among them friends, relatives, and fellow workers in the field of the Lord, that subscribe to Young Earth Creationism.  When I was a young man I did too.  While my study of the scriptures and the wisdom of teachers like Professor John Walton (the Lost World series of commentaries) have drawn me toward some version of Theistic Evolution because I believe it best explains both what we know of the world around us (i.e. science) and the theological emphasis of Genesis (rather than a scientific one) which doesn't offer information about when or how the universe, earth, and humanity were created but rather the much more important question of why God created.

That being said, given that none of us were there at the time, being dogmatic about an interpretation of Genesis 1 isn't very helpful to the Church, so I certainly have no issue with those who embrace Young Earth Creationism as long as they're not attacking those who also respect God's Word but understand this text differently.

Which brings us to Daniel Lancaster, the Beginning of Wisdom, and what the First Fruits of Zion are teaching about the End Times.  Trust me, there's a connection.  When learning about Boaz Michael and his supposed prophetic vision of God's plan to entice the descendants of Abraham to accept Jesus in this generation by convincing gentile Christians to live like Jews, one might rightly wonder why God would have allowed the Gospel to be deficient for 2,000 years before revealing the truth to only this man and his movement.  Honestly, a healthy douse of skepticism is required when anyone proclaims that he/she understands something in a way that many generations before have not.  For every Einstein who correctly glimpses relativity, there are hundreds of quacks and frauds whose ideas of perpetual motion, transmutation, or eugenics were rightly scorned and rejected by their peers. So, why do Boaz, Daniel, and the rest of the leaders at FFOZ think that God is acting now to finally reveal the true Gospel?  Answer: The End Times are upon us.

Here's the thing, you and I know that, "about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." (Mark 13:32, NIV)  Jesus repeatedly in the Gospels tells his followers that there will be signs pointing toward his return and coming Kingdom, but that by design we aren't supposed to know when that day will come.  Throughout the past 2,000 years of Church history there have been many who have believed they were the exception.  In fact, it was Baptist Pastor William Miller whose prediction that Jesus would return in 1844 started us on the path that led to the 7th Day Adventist Movement, which itself laid the groundwork for the Hebrew Roots Movement and now the First Fruits of Zion.  Ironically, then, erroneous End Times prophecy helped usher the false teaching of the Hebrew Roots Movement (FFOZ) into existence, and now another erroneous End Times prophecy is being used by them to justify their worldview.

In lesson 26 of the Beginning of Wisdom set of Torah Club materials, Daniel Lancaster uses the pseudepigraphal / apocryphal  Epistle of Barnabas as the framework of an argument that in essence is saying that the End Times must happen around the year 2,000 AD because the world must now be, using Young Earth Creationism chronology (there's the tie in), 6,000 years old, and Jesus will return to usher in a "seventh day" 7th thousand year Sabbath era.  Beyond the obvious contradiction with Jesus' words that tell us that all such calculations are a fool's errand, we also have the burning question of why we should put any stock in the words of the Epistle of Barnabas given that this letter has zero connection to the Barnabas found in the book of Acts.  While it is true that some of the Early Church Fathers believed it to be genuine, it was ultimately excluded from the canonical collection of scriptures, a decision we now know was the right one.  

By definition, non-canonical writings are non-inspired writings.  It works the other way too, canonical writings are inspired writings.  This is a circular argument, it can't help being one, but one that has deep implications for the authority of any writing/teaching that isn't included in the canonical scriptures.  The Reformers wished to emphasize this distinction by championing the belief in sola scriptura (scripture alone) as the ultimate authority for faith and practice.  We know that FFOZ considers this idea to be antisemitic (as per: Rethinking the Five Solae - by Jacob Fronczak, First Fruits of Zion's failed attempt to label Protestantism as inherently anti-Semitic), which makes sense given that they want to impose the traditions and teachings of various rabbis, both those who lived before and after Christ, on the New Testament as its interpretive lens.  

So, why FFOZ think they have the Truth when dozens of generations of Jesus' followers have in their view missed out on it?  Young Earth Creationism's timeline combined with a letter written by an unknown 2nd century author using Barnabas' name.  I don't know about you, but I'm going to pass on that line of thinking.

Two other things jump out at me from lesson 26: (#1) The insertion of [in the Messianic Era] and [in the World to Come] into the text of Hebrews 12:22-24.  This follows a pattern of word substitutions and "my translations" used repeatedly by FFOZ in their publications, as the 3rd way in which FFOZ alters the text of scripture to suit their own purposes.  Scripture does indeed need interpretive assistance to be understood in our own time, that is why we have things like commentaries and study bibles, but this level of eisegesis (reading into the text what one wants to find) is extremely dangerous.  

So, why do they insert these references to the future into the text of Hebrews 12:22-24?  It looks like the goal is to shift the emphasis away from the author of Hebrew's intended target, that is, the Church today, toward the upcoming Messianic Kingdom.  It is, then, just another attack on the Church in keeping with FFOZ's stated core belief that Jesus never intended to found a religion, therefore the Church has always been illegitimate.

(#2) The second noteworthy thing in lesson 26 is a candid admission during a discussion about dietary laws that the Council of Jerusalem, "did not foist the whole gamut of Jewish dietary laws upon the Gentile disciples" (p. 19)  While this may not seem remarkable to those familiar with the way in which Acts 15 has been understood for the past 2,000 years, it is a shocking admission from FFOZ given that Daniel Lancaster wrote a whole book built around the false premise that gentile followers of Jesus should be living under the Law of Moses (Restoration by D. Thomas Lancaster (FFOZ): A review - This is "another gospel" built on a foundation of lies).  In many of their published materials, podcasts, and videos, a radical reinterpretation of Acts 15 is a fundamental ploy of how FFOZ hopes to convince gentile Christians to abandon orthodoxy in favor of their version of rabbinic messianic Judaism.  I don't know why they were willing to admit in this one place (while denying it in many others) that the Jerusalem Council did indeed choose to not place the Law of Moses on the backs of new gentile believers, but here it is.

Restoration by D. Thomas Lancaster: A critical review (video version) by Pastor Powell

This is the video version of the work that was previously released in written form: Restoration by D. Thomas Lancaster (FFOZ): A review - This is "another gospel" built on a foundation of lies

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4 

Sermon Video: How the impending return of Jesus affects our lives now - Romans 13:11-14

The Apostle Paul's confident assertion in the previous passage that Love is the fulfillment of the Law, is to be integrated into our lives in light of the "present time."  What time is that?  The time between Jesus' establishment of the Church (and its birth at Pentecost) and his promised return to establish his kingdom (the End Times).  We live in an intermediate stage of unknown length.  Jesus could return today, or it could be 10,000 years from now.

So, what do we do with that uncertain certainty?  We live now in a way that way that we wouldn't be ashamed of if Jesus does indeed return in our lifetime.  We walk in the light, not the darkness, and imitate Jesus, while at the same time rejecting the temptation to sin.

The Climate Change denialism of Evangelicals will be damaging global Gospel witness for generations to come

 

It was painful, personally and professionally, to watch so many of my fellow Evangelicals (as well as Fundamentalists) in America deny the reality of COVID-19 in the face of ever increasing evidence.  It was also disheartening to hear fake 'cures' touted by some of these same voices while the readily available vaccine was rejected (as part of some global, even Satanic, conspiracy).  Having spent time in our area hospital praying with and for exhausted nurses, and having presided over the funeral of a fellow pastor and his wife who died on the same day of COVID, this lack of acceptance of basic facts and the nasty hostility toward doctors and scientists, has left a mark.  I won't soon forget it.  However, when it comes to the grand sweep of history, as traumatic and disruptive as COVID-19 was to the world for two plus years, it will one day be relegated to the history books along with such momentous moments as the fall of the Berlin Wall and 9/11.  Future generations will be unlikely to continue to hold the mostly politically motivated, fact denying, COVID-19 related actions of millions of American Christians against them.  Climate change is a different sort of beast.  Why?

The affects of COVID-19 are fast fading, wounds of this sort to the human psyche heal when the harms fade away, but the mounting affects of climate change are increasingly being felt.  If the predictive models are true, the ongoing cost will be upon the shoulders of billions of people throughout the world, and not just once, but over and over again with each successive drought, wildfire, flash flood, and hurricane.  COVID-19's impact lasted 2+ years, and we were all so tired of dealing with it, climate change won't have an expiration date, it will build and remain, year after year.  With widespread suffering, and the pain (as it always is with such things) felt more by the poor and powerless, the world will look to blame those who stood in the way of mitigating the worst of climate change's affects in the early decades of humanity's grapple with it, when decisive action might have made a big difference.  There will be plenty of blame to go around, China will receive some of it, but most will fall upon the West, America in particular, in part because only in America has there been widespread denialism and opposition to mitigating steps, even by private businesses. {In Europe, conservative parties disagree with liberal ones about how to mitigate climate change, not about the reality of it.}

To those on the outside looking in, it may seem curious that American Evangelicals/Fundamentalists have been so deeply and vehemently opposed to the scientific consensus regarding climate change {As if, by force of will, you can change facts}.  Four reasons for this stance stand out among others: 

(1) An anti-science attitude that dates back to the Scopes Trial {Young Earth Creationism paved the way for anti-science / anti-vaccine Evangelicals}

How exactly does one witness to those with a degree in science if your theology demands that they abandon generally accepted scientific conclusions on a whole host of topics in order to become a Christian?  This is a long standing issue, but one that has grown in recent years into outright hostility toward not only scientific facts, but those whose work revolves around science.

(2) An embrace of conspiracy theories, especially when they involve the U.N. {For example: An analysis of Rev. Danny Jones, "Is this Coronavirus a Sign of the End of the World?"}

When #'s 1 & 2 combine, we have the increasingly common acceptance of the notion that any scientific consensus is itself evidence of a conspiracy theory, something we saw manifested during COVID-19.  If 99% of global climate scientists agree that our current era's climate change is largely affected by human activity, that fact becomes a primary reason to oppose said consensus.  One of the reasons why is #4.

(3) A political viewpoint that declares that whatever 'they' support we must oppose, to the death. {The proper counter-point: Afraid of being called 'woke' or 'conservative'? Preach the Whole Counsel of God - Wisdom on this issue from John Piper}

We know this to be true: If the Republican party supported policies to combat climate change, and the Democrats (for whatever reason) opposed them, Evangelicals and Fundamentalists would be shouting their support of these policies to combat climate change from the rooftop, and thumping their chests about how important this is to God.  This is certainly not the only issue where we see the Church in America acting as if it has a Red wing and a Blue one, often to our shame.

(4) An in-our-lifetime eschatology that is convinced the End Times are upon us, thus negating any serious commitment to environmental conservation or protection.  If it is all going to be destroyed in the next few years, who cares? {This attitude disastrously applied to COVID-19: The Mark of the Beast isn't what you think.}

Yesterday I saw, for the first time, a meme from a pastor that proclaimed that climate change MUST be false because it violates the sovereignty of God.  A small amount of knowledge about world history will debunk this foolishness.  Humanity has been affecting the environment in which we live for thousands of years, mostly in a negative capacity.  North Africa during the time of the Roman Empire was a productive province, responsible for much agricultural production, things have changed.  God's power and control has not been diminished by this human impact on our world in the past, nor is it in the present.  

In the end, what is sorely lacking in much of the 'Christian' vitriol against the scientific consensus regarding climate change is a proper orthodox understanding of stewardship.  The Biblical narrative begins with stewardship in the Garden of Eden, but somewhere along the way segments of the Church in America decided that environmental stewardship was not our responsibility.  A biblical understanding of stewardship would also act as a check on the rampant consumerism, and disregard for the poort, that affects so much of the American Church, but alas it is a neglected theological imperative.

One hundred years from now, when communities the world over are grappling with the negative affects of climate change, those hoping to share the Gospel in them will have to respond to accusations such as this: "We are in this mess because of American Christians, why should we listen to what you have to say about Jesus?"

Sermon Video: "Be on your guard! Be alert!" - Mark 13:20-37

In this second half of Jesus' teaching on the End Times is contained several important truths: (1) That the tribulation to come will be 'shortened' for the sake of God's chosen people, (2) that in those days God will gather his elect from the ends of the earth, (3) and that nobody but the Father, Jesus included, knows the day/hour of his return. With that in mind, Jesus reiterates his call to his people to take precautions, to live as faithful servants (i.e. righteous and holy lives) here and now, lest we be caught off guard. In the end, we are all mortal, none of us knows how many days, months, or years we have to live. We need to spend that time, as individuals and as a church, as wisely as possible, both making the most of today and planning for the future.

Sermon Video: "the end is still to come" - Mark 13:1-19

Days before his own Passion, Jesus drops a bomb on his disciples that the Temple in Jerusalem is going to be completely destroyed. The disciples follow up with the most pressing question, when? Rather than offer up a timeline, Jesus begins to develop a theme of preparedness and faithfulness through the coming trials and tribulations.

John MacArthur fails to distinguish between necessary and unnecessary risk, plus End Times anti-government speculation

 

As his fight with the state of California continues, John MacArthur has shown, unfortunately, a lack of understanding about how pandemics work, and in this case fails to see the distinction between necessary and unnecessary risk.

In the short video, MacArthur urges, "Go to church...go in the building, don't sit in your parking lot."  The Church of Jesus Christ is NOT its building.  If the people of God worship in a park, that is the Church.  If the people of God worship in a parking lot, in a tent, or online, that too is the Church.  I don't understand this insistence that only when the sanctuary is used can the Church be fulfilling its call to corporate worship.  The text of Scripture makes no such distinction, Matthew 18:20 (NIV) "For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.”  Of course, the Early Church had no public buildings, but met in homes or in public squares, down by the river, wherever they could.  The Church in China and other hostile countries is forced underground (The Early Church in Rome literally underground in the catacombs during periods of persecution) to survive, but that persecuted Church is certainly being faithful, even if they never meet in a public building.

"You're not going to kill grandma".  Once again, John MacArthur minimizes the pandemic, insisting that the risk isn't real, as the death tolls climbs past 180,000, and that with less than 25% of Americans having been infected thus far, with the CDC reporting 5,799,046 cases, which is no doubt an under-count of the true total, but still leaves room for well over 200,000,000 infections if the virus were to run rampant in America.  From this week's CDC report: Based on death certificate data, the percentage of deaths attributed to pneumonia, influenza, or COVID-19 (PIC) for week 33 is 7.8%. This is currently lower than the percentage during week 32 (12.6%); however, the percentage remains above the epidemic threshold and will likely increase as more death certificates are processed.  Whether one agrees or disagrees about specific restrictions, whether from the local government or otherwise, it serves no useful purpose to build your position upon the false-hope that the pandemic isn't really a threat.  I've responded to this misconception on his part before, when GCC first decided to meet in-person with no social distancing and no masks {John MacArthur jumps the shark with COVID-19 response}.  Evidently, John MacArthur continues to refuse to believe the 'narrative' offered by the scientific community as a whole.  This points to a larger issue within the Church in America, and Evangelicalism in particular, of hostility toward science, and a refusal to accept scientific evidence that is politically/culturally unappreciated.  {Why I signed "A Christian Statement on Science for Pandemic Times" from BioLogos}

In addition, John MacArthur offers up a false analogy, one that others have used, equating the risk of the pandemic to the risk of car accidents.  In the first place, they're not the same kind of risk.  Exposure to the pandemic can be controlled, it can be mitigated, even if only partially, thus by choosing to increase that risk, in callous ways for yourself and for others, by ignoring scientific expertise regarding social distancing and masks wearing, one is taking an unnecessary risk.  Automobile travel is a necessary risk, transportation needs to occur in some form or other.  Car accidents only become unnecessary risks when those doing so text while driving, refuse to wear seat belts, drive too fast for the conditions, drink and drive, etc.  Otherwise, car accidents are a risk that is already being minimized, as much as possible.  It is not government tyranny to post speed limits, nor to require seat belts, nor to enforce the law through traffic stops.  This entire analogy is a false one, meant to make the arguments in favor of minimizing COVID-19 risk seem ridiculous, but false analogy are just that, false.

Lastly, John MacArthur is viewing the pandemic through End Times tinted glasses, as the first round in an all out assault upon the Church by a government intent upon destroying it.  He said, "More onerous attempts to lock the Church down in the future" are coming.  The host readily agreed with this assessment.  This is, of course, speculation; the future is unknown.  This view is relatively common in the Church today, I often hear people speak as if the government is chomping at the bit to send us all to the gulag.  There's just one problem with this 'sky is falling' mentality.  It isn't based in reality.  Are there elements within the government that are hostile to Christianity?  Yes, but hardly enough to justify the hysteria.  With nearly 70% of the country's population identifying as Christians, whom does John MacArthur think will be carrying out the crusade against the Church?  Which army will enforce the closure of the roughly 315,000 churches in America, where will the several hundred thousand ministers be incarcerated as 'enemies of the state'?  If you take the suggestion to its logical conclusions, the hype falls apart.  Also, when compared to the persecution of our brothers and sisters in hostile countries in the world today, or with that of the Early Church at the hands of Rome, can we really justify Apocalyptic warnings?  The Church in America has enjoyed for centuries, and enjoys still, a place of privilege.  We are not martyrs, to claim that mantle is a disservice to those who have indeed suffered for the name of Christ.

In the end, the reality of the pandemic is not a 'narrative' that you can choose to believe or reject, it is scientific fact, it is reality.  On the contrary, the narrative being advocated here by John MacArthur is one based in End Times anticipation, anti-government sentiment, and seemingly the influence of politics.  We, the Church, can do better than this, no matter whether we are able to safely meet in-person at this time, or due to the reality of COVID-19, must continue to fellowship and worship outside of the sanctuary.  We are the Church, those called by the Spirit to redemption by the Blood of the Lamb, not the building in which we meet.

 

Sermon Video: The defeat of Death by Jesus - 1 Corinthians 15:54-57

We love stories that end with, "and they lived happily ever after", but real life isn't like that, is it? We know that evil doesn't stay vanquished and that death will end even the best of love stories eventually. But this won't always be the case. When Christ returns, the dead in Christ will be raised to new life, immortal and transformed into Christ-likeness. Death will cease to exist once Jesus has established fully and completely God's reign, putting an end to rebellion and sin. For now, death itself is not a cause of fear for those who are in Christ, for we know that it is but a doorway to another life, and a better one. That confidence is available to everyone who is willing to put hope and faith in Jesus Christ.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: At the Last Trumpet: We will all be changed

When Christ returns, we will all be changed. All those who have faith in Jesus Christ, whether then living or already dead, will be resurrected or gathered (as needed) by Christ and will receive the transformation to Christ-likeness that has been promised. But when will these things occur? There is not on single interpretation of the totality of prophetic literature, some view the Rapture as the next event (Pre-tribution, pre-millenial), others see the millenial kingdom being established first (amillenial or post-millenial). However one interprets the Scriptures, this much is certain, Christ WILL return, and we won't know about it ahead of time. God has not given us the time, lest we look at the world with excessive optimism or pessimism, only the knowledge that these things will one day occur; and that's all we need. We can safely ignore those who claim to see signs of the impending End, and those who offer advice based on those supposed insights. Instead, let us continue to serve the Kingdom of God, and continue to live as though today may be our last day (as it may be for any of us) and plan as if God has many things left for us to accomplish here on earth.

* In addition, the message touches explains the flaws in the notion that COVID-19 is a sign of the End Times as well as the error in equating a potential vaccine with the Mark of the Beast.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

The Mark of the Beast isn't what you think.

1. The Early Church context of the Mark were certificates attesting to worship of the emperor.
In 249, Trajan Decius seized the throne of Rome.  He believed that the empire's troubles were caused by the neglect of the old gods (traditional religion was in steep decline, in contrast to the growth of Christianity and Mithraism).  "For Decius the solution was simple: enforce sacrifices on every citizen, man, woman and child, or at least the head of a household in the name of all of its members...It was obvious that the group which had most systematically avoided sacrifices in the empire was the Christians, and the confrontation which now took place turned a pitiless spotlight on an intransigence which had often previously been unobtrusive.  In 250 the new imperial policy was implemented with bureaucratic efficiency.  Those who sacrificed were issued with certificates of proof, some of which have been preserved for us in the rubbish pits and desert sands of Egypt.  The order was coupled with punishment, usually imprisonment but in some cases death, for those who refused.  Two later emperors, Trebonianus Gallus and Valerian, revived the policy in 252 and 257." (Christianity The First Three Thousand Years by Diarmaid MacCulloch, p. 173, emphasis mine.)
The generation who first received John's Apocalypse did not yet face such a stark choice, and persecution was localized not empire-wide for several generations, but the pressure to worship other gods (and the emperor as a god) already existed, both social and governmental.  The historical context points to a very strong connection to public false worship as the key element.

2. There is a long list of things that turned out to NOT be the Mark of the Beast.
Social Security numbers, bar codes, credit cards, cell phones, RFID tags, and now an upcoming COVID-19 vaccine have all been viewed, by some, as The Mark.  There's just one problem, each in turn has proven to be a false alarm, as will the current identification related to a potential vaccine, because none of them were connected to false worship (#3).  In addition, there will only be one period in history with a Mark of the Beast, and that will be the one where the events of Revelation are unfolding, without those clear and obvious precursors, there will be no Mark.  In case you're wondering, "Are those events already happening?"  The answer is no.  Whatever the correct interpretation of John's vision may be, it won't be ordinary history.  Life on this planet proceeds as it has for millenia, when they begin to occur, the Seals, Trumpets, and Bowls of Revelation will not exactly sneak up on anyone.

3. Every use of the term in Revelation is connected to worship of the Beast (false worship), thus it is a sign of chosen behavior, not an unwitting trap.
In the 4 passages below, Revelation 13:11-18, 16:2, 19:20-21, and 20:4, the Mark of the Beast is specifically connected to false worship.  Those who refuse to receive the Mark also refuse to worship the Beast, those who receive it also worship.  The overall picture of the Mark is not one of accidental acceptance or trickery.  The choice presented to the people is clear: Worship the Beast or be cut off from commerce/killed.  Note: This is the same choice faced by the Early Church.  There will be no accidental acceptance of the Mark (whether or not it is literal or figurative), only a conscious choice between one side or the other in the final showdown between God and all that oppose his will.

4. Those in Christ already have the Mark of the Lamb, and cannot belong to another.
One of the things that baffles me about the ongoing fear of a potential Mark of the Beast among Christians is that those who are in Christ are the only ones with nothing to fear from this future either/or choice.  Why?  We've already made our choice.  Those who are in Christ have already been sealed with the Holy Spirit, and cannot belong to another. {Ephesians 1:13 New International Version (NIV) And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit}.  In Romans 8, the Apostle Paul lists all the things that might possibly separate us from the love of God, only to reject them all as impotent compared to our designation as God's children.  What God has begun in us, he will finish.  So, why are some Christians afraid of being duped into accepting the Mark of the Beast?  The answers probably vary, but one of them is likely to be a lack of understanding about the doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints. 

So, unless the COVID-19 vaccine is only given to those willing to publicly worship someone who claims to have been healed from a fatal wound (Rev. 13:12) as an alternative to adherence to Jesus Christ, it is not, nor can it be, the Mark of the Beast.


Revelation 13:11-18 New International Version (NIV)
11 Then I saw a second beast, coming out of the earth. It had two horns like a lamb, but it spoke like a dragon. 12 It exercised all the authority of the first beast on its behalf, and made the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose fatal wound had been healed. 13 And it performed great signs, even causing fire to come down from heaven to the earth in full view of the people. 14 Because of the signs it was given power to perform on behalf of the first beast, it deceived the inhabitants of the earth. It ordered them to set up an image in honor of the beast who was wounded by the sword and yet lived. 15 The second beast was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed. 16 It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, 17 so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name.
18 This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man. That number is 666.

Revelation 16:2 New International Version (NIV)

2 The first angel went and poured out his bowl on the land, and ugly, festering sores broke out on the people who had the mark of the beast and worshiped its image.

Revelation 19:20-21 New International Version (NIV)

20 But the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who had performed the signs on its behalf. With these signs he had deluded those who had received the mark of the beast and worshiped its image. The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur. 21 The rest were killed with the sword coming out of the mouth of the rider on the horse, and all the birds gorged themselves on their flesh.

Revelation 20:4 New International Version (NIV)

4 I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

Revelation 7:3-4 New International Version (NIV)

3 “Do not harm the land or the sea or the trees until we put a seal on the foreheads of the servants of our God.” 4 Then I heard the number of those who were sealed: 144,000 from all the tribes of Israel.

Revelation 14:1 New International Version (NIV)

14 Then I looked, and there before me was the Lamb, standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father’s name written on their foreheads.

Is COVID-19 a sign of the End Times? The danger of being The Boy Who Cried Wolf.

As the global pandemic from COVID-19 continues to disrupt our world in ways not seen since the Spanish Influenza, the predictable sermons referring to this particular outbreak as a sign of the End Times have also begun to multiply.  There are however, important reasons rooted in proper biblical interpretation, history, and evangelism to caution any Christian, let alone a minister of the Gospel, from declaring that he/she sees current events as a sign of The End.

Biblical Interpretation: The proper foundation for interpretation of Scripture, or of any written or spoken statement for that matter, is exegesis.  That is, drawing out from the text what its author intended to be there, rather than eisegesis, which is putting into the text our own thoughts or biases.  The need to do this is especially acute regarding the Word of God, as our primary focus must be to determine what message God intended to send through the human authors he inspired.  If we ignore the intended message, and replace it with an interpretation that is derived from what we want the text to say, we not only disrespect the Scriptures, but are functionally denying the doctrine of inspiration as well.
The danger of eisegesis is very present when seeking to interpret prophetic texts whose prophecies we believe to have not yet been fulfilled.  The reason is simple: every generation is tempted to see these prophecies as being fulfilled in their own lifetimes through the set of circumstances they are living through.  We need only look at the period of history before the life of Jesus to see this in action.  Numerous false Messiahs rose to prominence, exciting the people's expectations that the messianic prophecies were being fulfilled in their midst, only to have those expectations amount to nothing when the 'signs' turned out to be falsely interpreted.  Part of the problem revolved around this reality: There could be only one Messiah to fulfills God's promises, all others must needs be false alarms, either willing or unwitting charlatans.
So it is with the prophecies concerning the End Times.  Since they were given, an unknown but sizable number of those who believe in the validity of the prophecies in question have thought themselves to be living in the times in question.  There is evidence that some of the Apostles themselves believed that Jesus would return in their own lifetimes (John 21:22-24 for example), but they were wrong, the desire of God to further spread the Gospel to the ends of the earth continued beyond them.  When Rome fell, it was interpreted as the beginning of the End, but it was not.  And so on throughout Church History, as crisis after crisis and unexpected event after unexpected event were viewed through the lens of the End Times, and would-be Antichrists were 'identified', all to no avail.  The End had not yet arrived, the various interpretations of Scripture that claimed it had was faulty.  Only one generation can be correct on this matter, each and every preceding one will be wrong.
What differentiates this pandemic from the Spanish Flu or Black Death as being a 'sign of the End Times'?  What makes this government response a plot of the Antichrist as compared to previous government actions?  The only answer can be an act of eisegetical interpretation.  "Because I say so" is not a stable foundation upon which to understand and apply the Word of God.

In the end the words of Jesus must be authoritative.  I will be scoffed at by those who claim to 'see' what is going on, called a fool or a patsy perhaps as well.  But there is no way possible to get around the explicit statements of Jesus on this topic, the only workaround is to ignore them.  Immediately AFTER a detailed series of signs about the beginning of the end, Jesus says, "But about that day our hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." (Matthew 24:36)  And then the very next statements of Jesus are multiple instances of warning about being in a constant state of readiness, no matter what, precisely because nobody knows when The End will come.  Hear this: It was not Jesus' purpose that one specific future generation would hear his words, interpret them correctly, and thus guess what "only the Father" knows.  How could they?  Rather, Jesus' purpose throughout the passage in question is that EVERY generation to come who would walk by faith would do so knowing that The End will one day come, as a surprise, and that each and every generation must live as if it will be interrupted by these cataclysmic events, and as if they will live out their days to a natural conclusion.  It is the tension of not knowing for sure when, but still knowing for sure, that we as disciples of Jesus are to embrace.

History: When looking back on history, we are not remotely living in times that justify a, "how could things get much worse?" attitude.  During the Middle Ages, the Church endured countless invasions of murdering barbarians intent upon taking women and children into slavery, who also regularly desecrated churches and slaughtered priests, as well as the unprecedented horrors of the Black Plague.  But these in time faded, with missionaries converting many of the pagans, and life improved. At the end of World War I, with the Austro-Hungarian and German Empires crumbling, Russia in the throes of Revolution, and four years of bloodshed on a scale unimaginable previously fresh in the collective nightmares of much of the world, Spanish Influenza swept the globe killing more than the war had.  And yet, it was not The End.  In those generations, there were many who 'saw the signs' and yearned for the Second Coming, but such was not the will of God.

One popular interpretation of the Apocalyptic literature in Scripture revolves around the notion of a One World Government (referred to these days as the New World Order).  In a previous generation, the United Nations was the sign of the One World Government, but the UN has sadly proven unable to prevent either war or genocide, let alone bring the world's nations together.   The European Union was supposed to be the harbinger of this, but now that unity is fracturing and far more likely to weaken than strengthen.  Nationalism is on the rise once more, not cooperation.  And yet, the response to COVID-19 will usher in a New World Order?  This is not the direction that the world is heading in, and even if it was, the interpretation of Scripture that sets forth this One World Government/New World Order as a 'sign' reflects the political/philosophical views of those promoting it (what they fear), not an exegetical interpretation of the relevant prophecies.  Remember, that the writers of the New Testament lived in an Empire spanning the entire Mediterranean world, and that our concepts of civil rights, personal freedoms, and constitutional liberties are foreign to their frame of mind, as is the fear of a government spanning multiple peoples/ethnic groups.  The history of the Ancient Near East was a history of multi-ethnic empires.  Therefore, when the interpretation of Apocalyptic literature in Scripture supplied by post-modern American Protestants happens to focus heavily on the this very fear, with a strong Isolationist and Libertarian element, how is it that this is supposed to reflect the original intent of authors to whom these concepts would be foreign?  How is this interpretation supposed to be one that could have been understood by the original audience?
Long story short, if the current interpretation of Scripture is more reflective of our own worldview than that of the authors, how can any 'signs' that we may see, even if they're seen correctly, be valid?  In other words, the 'sign' that you think you see is no sign at all if it has nothing to do with what the Word of God was actually predicting.  History has shown that even great theologians of the Church are not immune to reading God's Word through their own perspective and coming to erroneous conclusions because of that bias.  In the case of COVID-19, those who proclaim certainty regarding the End Times are guilty of both a recency bias (where current events outshine past ones in our minds) and the interpretation of Scripture through a post-modern American lens.

Evangelism: What, in the end is the danger of shouting, "The sky is falling!" prematurely?  We know The End is coming, what's the harm if we jump the gun?  The most immediate impact will be a distrust of our own government (not exactly a commodity with room to spare), as well as international medical associations, treatments, and vaccines that will lead people to, erroneously, balk at safety measures that they now view as tools of the Antichrist to institute the One World Government.  If this leads to violence, it will be doubly dangerous, but it will almost certainly lead to unnecessary deaths from this pandemic, especially if a vaccine is developed and refused by millions.  As dangerous as the implications may be in the public health/political sphere, they extend further.  What danger does it pose to the reputation of the Church and the sharing of the Gospel?
You don't want to be the next Millerites.  Who were they you ask?  The baptist lay preacher William Miller used calculations of Daniel's 2,300 Day prophecy to determine that the Second Coming of Jesus would occur on October 22nd, 1844.  When that day passed, those who had believed Miller's prediction suffered The Great Disappointment, and while most returned to their lives as they had been before, some sought explanations as to why Miller's calculations were slightly off, offering new dates in the near future.  Miller had tapped into a feeling of expectation that would be continued by the Adventists (whose doctrine of the Investigative Judgement is an attempt to explain the delay), the Jehovah's Witnesses, and the Mormons.  While one of those three retains orthodox trinitarian beliefs, the Witnesses and Mormons have left behind the teaching of the Apostles.  Church History has shown that 'certainty' about the date of the Second Coming is NOT a positive for the people of God, but a danger.

1 Peter 3:15 New International Version (NIV)
But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect

We are called upon to offer a explanation for the faith that we have.  That explanation becomes less comprehensible to those outside of the Church if they witness those acting in the name of Christ repeatedly proclaiming that they see 'signs' of the End, only to have the crisis pass and life return to some semblance of normal.  When the boy cried, "Wolf!" the villagers at first rushed to assist.  After several more false alarms, they ignored his final call.  The message of the Gospel is far too important for us to place an unnecessary barrier between ourselves and those with whom we hope to share the joy of faith in Christ.

An analysis of Rev. Danny Jones, "Is this Coronavirus a Sign of the End of the World?": 1 part very poor interpretation of Scripture, 2 part conspiracy theory = a danger to the Church

Recently the YouTube video of a sermon by the Rev. Danny Jones of the Northlake Baptist Church (GA) has exploded in popularity, and is currently being shared throughout my Facebook feed by various people.  So I watched the whole thing, took notes along the way, and offer this analysis:

If you want to watch the video, use the link below as it is from the church's own YouTube channel (thus no fear of editing) and the time signatures will match up with my comments {bold bracketed in italics}.  Note: I have no prior knowledge of this minister, am making no comments about his ministry as a whole or that of his church.  The matter at hand is the techniques, focus, and conclusions of this particular sermon.

Is this Coronavirus a Sign of the End of the World? - by Rev. Danny Jones, Northlake Baptist Church (GA)

24:30 - The sermon begins with a reading of 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12 with only a few comments
28:30 - Matthew 24 is referenced
29:30 - Daniel 2 is mentioned
30:24 - The interpretation of Daniel 2 is that no world empire is possible after Rome. {Daniel makes no mention of other empires beyond the 5 in his dream interpretation.  The Babylonians were certainly not a global empire, only a regional power.  Knowing that something will happen in the future does not preclude other things from happening.  This interpretation is adding to the limited point that the prophecy is making; perhaps not egregious, but a sign of things to come.}
30:30 - Daniel's 4th empire is connected explicitly with Western Civilization {Another eisegetical leap, while Daniel makes a connection between the empire of iron (typically thought of as Rome) and its follow-up, that of iron mixed with clay, to say that this must be something derived from Western Culture is not from the text itself.  Western Christians have always assumed that the Antichrist will be one of their own.  Is this a weird form of pride, as if our culture is the only one important enough for Satan to work through against God?}
30:44 - The terms "final world empire" and "One World Government" are first utilized in connection with Daniel 2.  {Daniel's prophecy says nothing about the prophesied empire being one that spans the world (the previous ones in the vision did not), thus is makes no claim that the empire of iron/clay will rule the whole world under one government.  This conclusion from Rev. Jones likely is drawn from other texts, such as Revelation, but not from Daniel 2.  Note the exact text of Daniel 2:39-43 below}
30:47 - "It will be weaker than the other empires, because they're going to try to build their New World Government by mixing and mingling the various ethnic groups around the world is what Daniel tells us."  {If this isn't a not very subtle critique of mixed-race marriages and other forms of integration, I'm not sure what to make of it.  Daniel is saying nothing of the sort; his text makes no mention of ethnic groups, and certainly isn't saying that an empire of mixed ethnic groups is weaker.  What kind of mixture will the people be, what will keep them from being united?  The assumption that this is about race/ethnicity is from Rev. Jones.  This is certainly eisegesis, hopefully it isn't racism too.}

Daniel 2:39-43 New International Version (NIV)
39 “After you, another kingdom will arise, inferior to yours. Next, a third kingdom, one of bronze, will rule over the whole earth. 40 Finally, there will be a fourth kingdom, strong as iron—for iron breaks and smashes everything—and as iron breaks things to pieces, so it will crush and break all the others. 41 Just as you saw that the feet and toes were partly of baked clay and partly of iron, so this will be a divided kingdom; yet it will have some of the strength of iron in it, even as you saw iron mixed with clay. 42 As the toes were partly iron and partly clay, so this kingdom will be partly strong and partly brittle. 43 And just as you saw the iron mixed with baked clay, so the people will be a mixture and will not remain united, any more than iron mixes with clay.  

31:30 - Daniel 7 mentioned
32:10 - Daniel 8 mentioned
32:40 - "This Antichrist will be a diplomat, a politician." {The text of Daniel 8 calls him, "a master of intrigue...He will become very strong but not by his own power." (Daniel 8:23-24).  This is a minor point, but part of the pattern of making assumptions and taking the prophetic texts further than what the authors are actually saying.}
32:55 - Daniel 11 mentioned
34:02 - Revelation 13 mentioned with respect to a "world government"
34:35 - Daniel 12, "transportation and information will increase, we've witnessed that during our lifetime." {Was Daniel talking about cars, planes, and the internet?  The text of Daniel says, "Many will go here and there to increase knowledge." (Daniel 12:4)  To state that Daniel was talking about the 20th century's technological increases is once again reading into the text what isn't there.  Why not the invention of the printing press, public education, steam trains and ships; why right here and right now?  Because it fits the overall narrative, not because it fits a proper exegetical interpretation of Daniel.  FYI, transportation and information have been increasing significantly for a thousand years, and have been on the rise since the time of Daniel.  Was Marco Polo a sign of the End Times?  He went 'here and there to increase knowledge'?  The point is simple: Making Daniel's words about "our lifetime" is entirely arbitrary.}
34:55 - "We've watched this Mystery of Iniquity in our time, for at least the last 100 years, billionaire bankers and businessmen have been trying to sell the world on a One World Government."  {A reference back to 2 Thessalonians 2, but once again one that makes huge assumptions.  #1 That Paul is talking about businessmen (and super rich ones at that) rather than any other type of influential person, #2 that Paul is talking about human beings at all, what prevents the 'secret power of lawlessness' from being from the spiritual realm?  #3 and that the Apostle Paul was talking in this text about a OWG.  Where in the text are the billionaire bankers trying to set up a OWG?  They are there in his interpretation because he needs them to be here to fit the narrative, not because Paul wrote anything to imply it.  Again, why now, why in our generation as opposed to a previous or future one?  Paul's words are no help in answering that question.}

2 Thessalonians 2:7 New International Version (NIV)
7 For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way.  

Here ends the interaction with Scripture, roughly 1/3 of the way through the sermon, 8 texts have been mentioned in 11 minutes, none have been examined in detail.  What the listener is left with is an impression of a broad Scriptural foundation for the next 2/3 of the message, but is in reality only a cherry-picked collection of references that are not nearly as connected, nor as clear, as the specific interpretation offered by Rev. Jones is claiming.  Significant questions are not touched upon: Are the texts of Matthew, Daniel, 2 Thessalonians, and Revelation all talking about the same time period?  The same person?  If previous generations of Christians saw these passages differently (and they did, some equally applying the interpretation to their own times, also using eisegesis), what makes this interpretation better than theirs? (given that they were wrong, Napoleon wasn't the AntiChrist, the Reformation wasn't the start of the Millenial Kingdom, etc.)  Daniel's prophecies are 2,500 years old, those of the NT are 2,000 years old; on what basis is the conclusion made that they are being fulfilled right now, and that this is the only interpretation of that fulfillment?  Context matters, authorial intent matters, original audience interpretation matters; none of which have been examined here.  The perspective is us, here, now.  If we don't start our interpretation with them and there before considering its implications for us, here, our conclusions will reflect our circumstances and our priorities, not those of the Word of God.

From 35:44 to 1:02:37, Rev. Jones issues a string of conspiracy theory culprits, workers in the vast web of the OWG that he is weaving together to call into question everything about the COVID-19 pandemic.

35:44 - Marxism and the Hegelian Dialectic are posited as the lens through which the conspirators are operating.  It is insinuated that 'globalists' are the cause of terrorism, the global warming 'hoax', and various pandemics, all to be able to offer 'pre-packaged' solutions of more government control.
36:50 - Trump's presidential election {See 100:00:05 for the conclusion that no politician can stop the OWG.  That being the case, why would the globalists try to impeach Trump if he is powerless against their plotting?}
37:33 - When impeachment fails, the globalists next move is COVID-19 {Just one problem with the timeline, COVID-19 was already spreading BEFORE the impeachment process began.  Later, Rev. Jones states that COVID-19 was in the works even earlier as part of the globalist plot.  The 'globalists' are portrayed as nearly all powerful, able to shape the world, yet unable to remove one politician standing in their way?  Consistency is lacking, that's not a good sign.}
37:40 - Rockefeller, George Soros, Bill Gates, and Henry Kissinger listed as part of the conspiracy {Two Jews in the list of headliners, I don't know if this is a coincidence for Rev. Jones, but it isn't for many who agree with him.}
39:10 - Warren Buffet, Oprah Winfrey, and Ted Turner added to the list; along with the start of an anti-vaccine stance that will grow toward the end.
39:45 - The Davos meeting mentioned, will be repeated, as the cabal where billionaires plot to take over the world
40:20 - The US Army is involved (through DARPA)
40:40 - Bill Gates' Netflix movie, Pandemic (2017), "Is Bill Gates a prophet or is it a plan?" {The idea that Bill Gates planned and put into motion a global pandemic is hinted here, not with subtlety.}
41:15 - Johns Hopkins work with a Chinese doctor is mentioned, "interesting to note" {More guilt by association, more inferences for the true believers to nod at and say, "Oh, I see."}
42:00 - World Military Games in Wuhan in 2019 {Why mention this if not to imply that the US Military is part of the conspiracy?}
42:50 - Dr. Anthony Fauci mentioned, primarily as a dupe of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
45:01 - "Novel means Corona didn't come crawling out of the woods, makes you wonder where it did come from?" {It takes 30 seconds and Google to show how much nonsense this sentence is.  Novel actually means: not previously identified.  It says nothing about the origin of the virus, simply that we have not previously experienced it.}
45:50 - "I was planning on being a doctor, I was a pre-med major" {Less excuse for the last statement then.}
47:45 - "Something is going on there..." {Conspiracy theories, insinuations, these are not fitting for a preacher of the Word of God.}
48:10 - Bill Gates calls for a shutdown
48:45 - Where did it come from?  Either man-made by China or U.S. {Clearly a false dichotomy, one that dismisses the natural cause for a nefarious one, without proof.}
49:15 - "Bottom Line: This novel coronavirus, COVID-19, is a manufactured crisis, designed to deceive people to accept a radically different world" {First question: What has any of this to do with the text of 2 Thessalonians?  Second question: How does he KNOW, not suspect, not think, know?}
49:35 - Not saying people don't get sick or die from COVID-19 {Something, at least.}
49:45 - Flu comparison {Debunked over and over by real doctors, real professionals.}
50:25 -  30k deaths compared to a "low flu year" {The problem, of course, is that this sermon aired on April 19th, the number in the US has doubled since then, and is only going higher.  The flu comparison was wrong when he made it, is getting worse each day.}
50:35 - "Why are we being deceived and where are we going with this?"  According to Daniel and Paul: The Mystery of Iniquity to prepare for the Antichrist.  {Daniel and Paul said nothing of the sort, that's your conclusion being paraded as the fulfillment of their prophecy; this sermon doesn't serve the text of Scripture, it uses it as a prop.}
51:15 - Former President Obama thrown in for good measure
54:45 - With sermons now given online, "All of our words are being saved and stored in the NSA's new and huge data center in Utah, which as long as we have a government that's ok with Christianity is ok, but what if our New World Government is more like China?  Then our very words will be used against us in a criminal trial."  {Where to begin, evidently Big Brother is coming for us all too; and soon.  My sermons are public, always have been, I'm happy to have anyone hear them, including the NSA, if they're listening, which they are not.}
100:35 - Will you take the vaccine when it comes out?  The vacccine for COVID-19 is connected to biometric tattoos, Bill Gates, MIT, Davos, etc.
101:10 - Revelation 13, no longer about the vaccine, now about the Mark of the Beast with the U.N. named as the One World Government.  {The anti-vax movement is growing, and it will cost lives worldwide from preventable diseases.  If millions refuse to get the COVID-19 vaccine because of conspiracy theories like this, people will die.  The 'this is the Mark of the Beast' false cries have been repeated endlessly; terrifying to know that now they will be used to scare people about life saving medicine.  This is entirely irresponsible, and morally repugnant.}
101:40 - Roman Emperor Domitian's persecution cited as a parallel, those who get the vaccine (it is implied) are one step closer to denying Christ.  {If that isn't the implication, why bring up that moment in Church History when Christians were given a choice between obeying the government and holding to their profession of faith?  Those who believe Rev. Jones would be fools if they accept the COVID-19 vaccine if/when it is a reality; if they believe him and refuse, some of them will die of COVID-19.}
1:02:37 - Is COVID-19 a sign of the End?  Don't know {A surprising conclusion given the past 45 minutes, but actually the correct answer.}

In the end, the interpretation of the Biblical passages is both brisk and faulty (eisegesis), 2/3 of the message has nothing to do with Scripture and everything to do with politics and conspiracy theories.  This message is dangerous, and there are many more like it.  Why?  Because it has real world implication for people's health and well being, AND it portrays to the Lost that followers of Jesus are anti-government, anti-vaccine, and not to be trusted regarding facts and truth.  COVID-19 is a controversial topic, but handing the Word of God this way in response is helping no one, and potentially harming many.

Sermon Video: Christ will reign - 1 Corinthians 15:23-28

How does it all end? The Apostle Paul offers an interesting analysis of the End Times by approaching it through the lens of authority/power. When Christ returns, and begins the final unfolding of God's will, it will be a tumultuous time indeed, but one in which the authority, power, and dominion of the Son of God (achieved by the Father, and given back to the Father by the Son) will become unchallenged and unquestioned, with even Death itself falling victim to the glorious reign of Jesus Christ.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: The LORD dwells in Zion - Joel 3

The finale of the message of the prophet Joel is upon God's ongoing concern for the people and land of Israel.  "In those days", in other words, during the End Times, God will administer his justice upon those who have chosen to mistreat the descendants of Abraham, a strong warning against the evil of Anti-Semitism.  At that time, Jesus will also reign from Jerusalem, as God once more dwells within the Holy City.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: "Everyone who calls on the name of the LORD will be saved" Joel 2:12-32

In the midst of a message of woe, the prophet Joel shares the desire of the LORD to relent and heal his people.  "Even now," the message begins, for it is not too late because God is "gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and abounding in love," if the people will repent, God will forgive and save them.  This is the heart of the Gospel.  God is indeed a holy and righteous judge, and the great day of his wrath will one day come, but he also abounds in love and mercy and desires that all men would repent and be saved.  Why speak of judgment when offering a message of hope?  Because humanity's rebellion is a deep-seated condition, and most will not repent until they realize the extent of their danger and have given up trying to save themselves.  Hope remains, all those who call upon the name of the LORD, who hope in him, will be saved.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: The real Happily Ever After - Isaiah 9:7a

Many a tale, particularly those aimed at children, ends with some variation of, "and they all lived happily ever after".  Real life isn't like that, it doesn't suddenly become devoid of problems, nothing in our experience can approximate the fairy tale's claim of "happily ever after".  Are they any real happy endings that won't end?  Only one story, thankfully a factual one, will have an ending that will be glory and joy everlasting, that of the Chosen One of God, the Messiah.
The prophet Isaiah described who the Messiah would be in Isaiah 9:6, here in 9:7, the prophet speaks about what the Messiah will do.  The promise that he will reign on the throne of David with an unending government of justice and righteousness remains a future prediction, for the throne of David in Jerusalem remains vacant nearly 2,700 years after the last king of Judah.  We can, however, have confidence that this kingdom will be established, for the LORD's promise to send a Messiah was fulfilled when Jesus came as Immanuel, God in the flesh.  Jesus came first to serve and to save, he will return in power to reign.  What will that kingdom look like?  It will be unlike anything we can imagine, for no human government has ever been established upon justice and righteousness.

As Advent approaches, remember that God not only promised to send a Messiah, but to establish and everlasting kingdom among men as well, and while we will never know the day of its arrival, it is always closer with each new day.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: The great and dreadful day of the LORD - Malachi 4:1-6

What does the future hold?  Nearly every culture and religion has an explanation about how the world will one day end, most viewing it as a time of judgment.  Through the prophet Malachi, the LORD warns that a "great and dreadful" day of judgment will one day come, a time when the wicked will be destroyed with fire and the righteous will find healing and renewal.  The only hint as to when this day will arrive is that is will be after the return of Elijah, an event that Jesus would later equate with the arrival of John the Baptist.  As the people of God, we do not know when the day of judgment will come, but we do know with certainty that such a day is coming.  Let us then be ready, walking morally upright before our God, so that he will find us ready if that day be soon or not for many generations.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

The Gospel or the Gun: Which do you trust?

In 1945, General George Patton wanted to invade the Soviet Union and wipe out the Communists with the help of the remnant of the shattered Nazi army.  In 1951, General Douglas MacArthur wanted to nuke China during the Korean War, forcing President Harry Truman to fire him.  There are always those who believe that the answer to a threat is the barrel of a gun.  It is indeed true that the strong must protect the weak, and a military solution may be the only moral option, but it is also true that militancy and nationalism can run amok with potentially peaceful solutions (or at least less violent ones) lost in the hysteria of fear and fear-mongering.

It is becoming increasingly clear that a number of American and European Christians, including some famous people in leadership positions, view a global war with Islam as inevitable, and perhaps even preferable.  One of the reasons for this militant stance is often a Pre-Tribulation Eschatology that sees a WWIII style conflict as a precursor to the Rapture, and something that cannot or should not be avoided, as it would usher in the return of Christ.  I've written before about the dangers of letting a particular view of Eschatology color your morality and attitude, so that's nothing new, but the issue of confronting Islam has another element that is also troubling.  It would appear that many of those in the pro-war camp are leaning that way because they envision Islam spreading globally and taking over the West through immigration and higher birth rates.  While such an argument might hold water with a statistician, how is it that those who believe in the power of faith, and the triumph of the Gospel, are terrified of the spread of Islam?  If this is simply a battle of ideas, like the Communism vs. Capitalism debate of the Cold War, then it truly would be a confrontation with an unknown outcome, but this is not what Christians believe, at least they shouldn't.  Christianity is based upon historical fact, and those who follow Jesus Christ believe in the triumph of the Gospel over the forces of darkness, whatever they may be.  In Philippians 2:5-11, the Apostle Paul speaks of the ultimate triumph of Jesus Christ, and foretells the day when "every knee should bow...and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father."  Do God's people really believe these words, or do they put more faith in the power of the gun?  How could a professing Christian's priorities be so eschew that he/she would prefer a war, and with it the tens if not hundreds of millions of civilian casualties that would result, to letting the Gospel contend, as it has since the founding of the Church 2,000 years ago, with whatever philosophies, ideologies, or religions which oppose it?

The triumph of the Gospel, foretold in Scripture, is found in the conversion of the Lost, the redeeming of those apart from God, not in the obliteration of those who disbelieve in the explosion of a bomb.  I believe in the power of the Gospel, it will triumph over Islam, and all other beliefs, no matter what they may be, in the end, I'm not looking to destroy those who oppose the will of God, it is my responsibility as a disciple of Jesus Christ to share the wonderful grace of Jesus with them, that they too might willingly and gladly bow their knee before the King of Kings.

Don't let your assumptions about the End Times define the Church.

I could have entitled this post, "Don't let your Eschatology determine your Ecclesiology", but that would probably have made most people skip reading it.  How we define the Church is a very important part of our theology as Christians.  It is imperative that we work together with everyone else who is a genuine part of the Church of Jesus Christ in order to fulfill our mission to share the Gospel.  There is danger in defining the Church too narrowly, which would turn those who are supposed to be our brothers and sisters into rivals, or at worst enemies, and there is danger in defining the Church too broadly, which would turn those who are supposed to be the object of our witness to the Gospel into those we wrongly assume to have already accepted it.  For a doctrine this important, we ought not allow anything other than the entire teaching of Scripture on the subject to be our guide.
In reality, however, a significant segment of those claiming to be Christians are allowing their assumptions about the End Times to be the most significant factor in determining their conclusions to these very important questions.  Most of those who believe that we're currently entering into the final days before the beginning of the Apocalypse also believe that one of the supporting evidences of that conclusion is their belief that 99% of all those who think that they are Christians, are in reality not.  This pessimism about the current state of the Church is a reflection of a theology of the End Times that requires the Church to be in a dire state prior to the return of Christ.  If the return of Christ is imminent, then the Church must be in a dire state, and therefore the definition of those who truly belong to the Church is made to fit that expectation in a predictably gloomy fashion.
There is, of course, great danger in making assumptions about when Christ will return, something that Jesus himself warned about.  One example of that danger is the pessimism and antagonism it fosters among those have convinced themselves that his return is imminent.  The Church, all of the Church, ought to be working together for the sake of the kingdom.  The question of how we define the Church is far too important to let it be influenced by anything other than the Word of God.

Sermon Video: Be Patient, until the Lord's Coming - James 5:7-9

In light of the corruption and vice caused by the pursuit of, and attainment of, wealth outlined by James in verses 1-6, he now calls for patience on the part of the people of God.  These injustices will of course be ended when Christ returns, for his disciples the task then is to persevere in faithfulness until that day.  How long must we wait?  The answer is unknowable, Abraham's promise that all nations would be blessed through him was about 2,000 years in its fulfillment through Jesus, the return of Christ could be tomorrow or it could be 10,000 years from now.  When he will return is not our concern, we know that he will.  We also know that it is the mercy and love of God which delays this promised return, allowing more time for the ranks of those redeemed by the blood of the lamb to swell ever more full.
In the end, we must simply stand firm, fulfill our mission as a Church, working together for the sake of the Gospel.  He will one day return, for now, we need to be about his business, patiently.

To watch the video, click on the link below: