. HOME .

<- PREVIOUS . NEXT ->

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)

<- PREVIOUS . NEXT ->