Agenda Eschatology Part 1

Kingdom Files

I will state the teaching. I will state who teaches it and why. I will state why I feel it’s false and merely “agenda eschatology “.

1. Nero was the Beast/Antichrist. This proves that there is no future antichrist. This is what the early church taught.

Preterists teach that the Emperor Nero was the Beast of the Book of Revelation because they need all end-times events to have been fulfilled in 70 AD.

Nero died in 68 AD. There is no historical record of Nero having even visited Jerusalem. This should be enough to disprove their beliefs but lets look further.

First, a preterist will usually teach about how awful and evil Nero was. They make it sound like this is proof that he was the antichrist. That is a smokescreen and is of no value. Because there is no Biblical evidence for their teaching, they have to appeal to…

View original post 2,475 more words

The Cross 101

Kingdom Files

Was Jesus murdered ?

Was Jesus framed for a crime that He didn’t commit ?

“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.” John 3:16

The Father gave.

“So Jesus said, “When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am He, and I do nothing on My own initiative, but I speak these things as the Father taught Me. And He who sent Me is with Me; He has not left Me alone, for I always do the things that are pleasing to Him.” John 8:28,29

“Now I have told you before it happens, so that when it happens, you may believe. I will not speak much more with you, for the ruler of the world is coming, and he has nothing in Me; but…

View original post 660 more words

Thoughts on Open Theism and The Theology of Idolatry

Kingdom Files

Certain beliefs are emerging at a quickening pace in the modern church.

The main theme that seems to bind all of the “latest” thoughts on God and His Word together is……the ascendancy of man.

Man’s opinion. Man’s power. Man’s gifts. Man’s intellectualism. Man’s philosophy. Man’s reasoning. Man’s pattern.

It’s the same old lie of idolatry. Creating a god in OUR image and likeness that we can handle and touch and control. Disseminating our beliefs of this god to others in language that doesn’t allow anyone to feel confronted or confrontational. Or presenting a god that soothes the itch of the many who just want to bask in mans glory. Or presenting a “crossless” salvation call. Or a “crossless” walk with Him. Or redefining the nature of God so as to eliminate wrath or anger or jealousy.

Preterism -Universalism -Annihilationism -Antinomianism -Inclusivism -Open Theism….all of these “isms” are tools that are…

View original post 947 more words

Not That Raptureless Book Again Part Six

In the book Raptureless by Jonathan Welton and on the Raptureless website, John Chrysostom is touted as a Hero For An Optimistic Future. In fact, in chapter 3 of Raptureless, which is on The Great Tribulation, the author quotes John Chrysostom after making the following statement….

However, as I studied Matthew 24, I discovered that, throughout church history, most Christians believed that the whole chapter of Matthew 24 occurred at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. In fact, many of the well-known Church leaders have taught this. Here are quotations from a few:”

First let me comment on what I just quoted. Partial quotes prove only that the one using the partial quote is manipulative. They prove nothing else.  A truer statement would be that throughout church history pretty much all Christians believed that Jesus’ words on the destruction of Jerusalem took place just as He prophesied AND one day the rest of Matthew 24 would happen.  Now back to John Chrysostom. Here is the quote from the Raptureless book.

“You will preach everywhere …. Then he added, “This gospel of the kingdom will be preached throughout the whole world, as a testimony to all nations; and the end will come.” The sign of this final end time will be the downfall of Jerusalem. —John Chrysostom”’

Now….if we are to believe the author of Raptureless, this proves that John Chrysostom was saying that Matthew 24 was fulfilled in 70AD and that nothing in that chapter would take place in the future.   The fact is that John Chrysostom did believe that Jesus’ prophecy on the destruction of the Temple was amazingly fulfilled.  But he also had much more to say if you just keep reading.  Here is a portion of what he says…..

“But mark how here He says nothing of war (for He is interpreting the doctrine concerning His advent), but of them that attempt to deceive. For some in the days of the apostles deceived the multitude, for they shall come, says He, and shall deceive many; Matthew 24:11 and others shall do so before His second coming, who shall also be more grievous than the former. For they shall show, He says, signs and wonders, so as to deceive if possible the very elect: Matthew 24:24 here He is speaking of Antichrist, and indicates that some also shall minister to him. Of him Paul too speaks on this wise. Having called him man of sin, and son of perdition, He added, Whose coming is after the working of Satan, with all power and signs and lying wonders; and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish. 2 Thessalonians 2:9-10

There is more on his comments on Matthew 24 that shows his belief in a future Antichrist and a time of great distress but this is enough. And… no… I am not giving a partial quote to manipulate you. I just believe that sometimes enough is enough. John Chrysostom actually connects Matthew 24 (after explaining how Jesus’ prophecy on the destruction of the Temple was fulfilled) with the time right before the Second Coming, AND includes the Antichrist, AND connects it to the writings of Paul ! A quick side note….remember to the preterist there is no Antichrist because it’s the spirit of Gnosticism. Well….one of the Heroes For An Optimistic Future disagrees.

Guess what ? I could write the same type of article on John Wesley, Charles Spurgeon, Thomas Newton and……enough is enough.  The danger with this type of book or even the type of writer or teacher that propagates this line of teaching is that they are teaching a philosophy NOT an eschatology. They throw in buzzwords like “optimistic” and “victorious” and make their hearers feel faithless or religious if they don’t agree or have questions concerning certain claims.  Their followers parrot what they are taught ( or tell you to read Raptureless) without checking the facts (biblical or historical) because of how the “philosophy” makes them feel.

Let me ask you a question….

If you can’t trust a teacher or writer on such an easily verified claim or quote as this (and many more)….

then how can you trust them on the shaping of your eschatological beliefs or Biblical view ?

Another Spirit and Covenant

Kingdom Files

The Old Covenant (Moses, Israel, Sinai….you know the story) was a covenant of works.  Laws were given.  Expectations established.  Obey and be blessed. It was a covenant God made with man.  A history of failure and rejection and judgment ensued.  All fell short.  A New and Better Way was necessary.  Jesus Christ is that Way.  He fulfilled all for us.  We now are living the New Covenant….in Him… Him…..through Him.

The covenant with Noah was not a covenant of works.  It was not a covenant based upon what man did.  God never said….if you do this I won’t smite the earth with a flood again,  but if you do this I will make the last flood look like a sneeze.  Nope never.  The Lord purposed in His own heart and established the covenant with Himself.  He gave the rainbow as a token or sign.

The covenant with Abraham was not a covenant…

View original post 686 more words

The Anitchrist and the Early Church

Kingdom Files

Polycarp (69AD to 155AD) was personally instructed by the Apostle John and communicated regularly with many who had seen Jesus. He served as the bishop of Smyrna. His writings stressed perseverence in the faith, avoiding materialism and financial dishonesty. He also fought against Marcionism, which redefined the nature of God and rejected the Old Testament and its teachings, along with other heresies.

Irenaeus (130AD to 202AD) was a disciple of Polycarp. He wrote the five volume work AGAINST HERESIES. In volume 3 of AGAINST HERESIES, Irenaeus wrote of Polycarp and that he had always taught the things which he had learned from the apostles and “alone were true.”

Hippolytus (170AD to 235AD) was a disciple of Irenaeus. Hippolytus believed it was his obligation as a disciple of Irenaeus; who was a disciple of Polycarp; who was a disciple of the Apostle John to master, teach, and preserve the unchanged teachings…

View original post 484 more words

The Answer To The Antichrist Spirit

Kingdom Files

Peter received the greatest revelation ever given to a man.

Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the Living God.

After voicing this revelation, Peter chastised the Lord for talking about the suffering He was going to endure.
Jesus then turned to Peter and addressed Satan commanding him to,

“Get behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to Me; for you are not setting your mind on God’s interests, but man’s.”

Peter, who had been in the very presence of Jesus Christ for years, was wrong.
So wrong.
Why ?

The spirit of antichrist.

Through this exchange between Jesus and Peter, we have a glimpse into the seductiveness of the antichrist spirit.
This spirit is so seductive that it will make men say things, in the very presence of Jesus Christ, that are the exact opposite of what He is saying.

Think about that for a moment.

The spirit…

View original post 266 more words

Optimistic Eschatoloy….Fantasy or Reality ?

1.  If the Book of Revelation was written after 70AD, then Optimistic Eschatology loses its foundation. History points to a 90AD to 95AD authorship. The majority of scholars agree. If your whole house loses its foundation based upon the dating of one book, then maybe you have built upon a faulty foundation ?

2.The optimistic eschatologist “leads” you to believe that the Greek word “ge” is only used to refer to a local inhabited civilization or to the land of a particular nation. They need this definition to be accepted so they can “prove” that the Book of Revelation and 2 Peter 3:10 refer to Jerusalem and Israel in 70AD.

Here are two of at least 150 clear examples that “ge” refers to much more than a local civilization.

1 Corinthians 10:26 “ For the earth is the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof.”

Hebrews 1:10  “ Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:”

The Greek word “ge” can refer to a specific location.  For example

Matthew 2:21  “And he arose, and took the young child and his mother, and came into the land of Israel.”

But do you see the difference ? The context determines how to determine what “ge” is referring to. In the Matthew passage they are leaving Egypt and entering the land of Israel.  “Ge” is obviously referring to one local inhabited civilization to another.

Now look at 2 Peter 3.  The whole chapter speaks of creation and the judgment of the flood.  Neither of those were local events.  Only someone practicing eisegesis could come to the conclusion that Peter was writing about 70AD.  Eisegesis  is the transferring of one’s own opinion, bias, or filter upon a passage of Scripture.  It is actually a form of control and manipulation. Apply the same principle to the usage of the Greek word “ge” to the Book of Revelation and you will understand that it is written for the whole church, throughout the whole earth, for all of our days, until the consummation of all things.

3.  Optimistic eshcatologists need you to believe that Nero was the antichrist so that the events of the Book of Revelaton fit into their 70AD timeline.  Nero died on June the 9th in 68AD.  Vespasian was the actually Emperor who lived during the events of 70AD.   His son Titus oversaw the sacking and destroying of Jerusalem.  So why do they claim Nero was the Antichrist ? Because they need him to be.  Optomistic eschatologists  use a form of historical eisegesis to get this one to work.  They force their filter upon history combined with bits of the Bible.  Some in the early church expected Nero to come back from the dead and reign as the antichrist.  Nero was a shadow of the antichrist.  Just like Antiochus Epiphanes was.  Or Hitler.  He was definitely evil but did not come near to fulfilling anything expected of the antichrist.

4.  Mathew 24:34 “Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.”  Optimistic eschatologists need a generation to be 40 years so that this verse and all of the Olivet discourse and the Book of Revelation applies to the people living in the days preceding 70AD. A generation is never defined as 40 years.  It could be 70 or 38.  Or 116 or 52.  The point is that deciding a generation is 40 years is another form of eisegesis. Forcing your filter, view or bias on a passage.  Did the generation that was alive in 70 AD experience Mattew 24:30,31 ?

“And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.”

If they did then there is no return of the Lord for this generation or even the next.  The Second Coming already took place.

5.  Optimistic eschatologists distort the historical record.  The belief in the antichrist (future and personal) was in the early church.  There is no reference to 70AD in any way other than as a fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy. There is no “chatter” among the church fathers of all the amazing things that happened and were fulfilled by the destruction of Jerusalem.  Chiliasm (the belief in a future 1,000 year reign of the returned Lord upon the actual earth) was the predominant view.  The Roman Catholic Church began killing chiliasts systematically in later years. The Roman Church needed to eradicate those who believed in the return and rule of Christ, because it conflicted with its elevation of the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church to a place of dominion over the earth.

The oldest known complete commentary that we have from the early church is Hippolytus’ Commentary on the Book of Daniel (210 A.D.) In that commentary, the future reign of Christ on earth is discussed.  Hippolytus also wrote of a future desolation by a coming antichrist and compared it to the desecration committed by Anitochus Epiphanes. He also referred to “the final week of the world”.

Tertullian (160AD to 220) even commented on the two witnesses in Revelation 11 and said,

“Enoch was translated and so was Elijah. They did not experience death because it was postponed.  They have been reserved for the suffering of death, so that by their blood they may extinguish the Antichrist.