This post is an aggregation of my dissertation defense which was conducted over a few weeks asynchronously between myself and my 3 person committee. The process typically included comments and questions being forwarded to my Advisor and then he would forward those comments/questions along with his comments and questions (often about the comments and questions from the other committee members) to me. I would then respond by either comment via email or by making changes to my dissertation document and resubmitting for approval.
I have gathered together the majority of the comments and questions here and have provided my commentary, answers, or I have documented what changes were made to the dissertation itself. Notes concerning grammar changes to be made on the dissertation were skipped in compiling this document. The numbering system is out of order due to attempts to group together like minded questions. Formatting is a bit odd in places due to WordPress’ stupid WYSIWYG editor. I should have used html. (Note: I also completed a mock dissertation defense while waiting for the notes to be returned from the committee. Here is a copy of those questions and my responses.
Received from Advisor on 6-11-21.
[From undesignated committee member]
…………………
1. Quote from Dissertation: “Jude and Peter are both handy examples where they not only directly quote apocryphal writings from their period, but they did so on numerous occasions and also frequently made off-handed inferences, as if their readers would be well versed in the same content.” From Committee Member: “Jude and (presumably) 2 Peter. These two books have the most dubious origin in the New Testament canon, and one is clearly the source for the other. Indeed, these two books contain references to angels, demons, spiritual warfare, and events in the Book of Enoch. This is a far cry from establishing that the authors of 2 Peter and Jude believed that fallen angels genetically corrupted humanity and created a race of “ungodly hybrid giants” (p. 48), much less that any other author of the New Testament believed this. The author argues from Jude’s and Peter’s references to angels and demons, to a specific interpretation of Genesis 6. The author simply does not make the connection. Paul clearly believed that there was a hierarchy of supernatural powers and that spiritual warfare is a reality, but he never mentions this interpretation.” Quote from Dissertation: “was not only the interpretation of Genesis 6 by the early Church Fathers, but it was also the interpretation of the New Testament writers as well.” (p. 48).”
The first quote here provided by the committee member is actually an indirect quote I used from Eerdmans Commentary on 1 Enoch. It is actually not my statement.
To state that 2 Peter and Jude are of a dubious origin is quite simplistic. In reality, it is unclear who wrote what first and who copied what from whom. As Beale explains it in his Commentary on NT Use of the OT, there are elements of each that are original. There are likewise many different views on these two books. 1. Peter copied from Jude. 2. Jude copied from Peter. 3. Peter and Jude copied from a single but separate source. 4. Peter and Jude did not copy from either or, but were both led by the Holy Spirit of God and produced simply similar quotes. If their origins are in such question that they cannot be used as references, then they probably should not have been included in the canon to begin with.
As it stands, both Peter and Jude thought the Book of Enoch was important enough as an example to prove their point that Peter uses it at least once and Jude twice. Enoch clearly held to the angelic view of Genesis 6:2. It would stand to reason, then, especially given the nature of the references they alluded to, that both Jude and Peter also accepted Enoch’s account and interpretation as valid. It was a popular interpretation from the first century all the way to the fourth. It is the only interpretation that fits with the examples Jude and Peter are attempting to make.
Additionally, Paul references a great deal about “a hierarchy of supernatural powers and that spiritual warfare is a reality.” It is evident that the supernatural realm is his worldview. He can in no way be mistaken for a Sadducee. And, though it is true that Paul never directly references the angelic view of Genesis 6:2, he does indirectly reference it in his 1 Co 11:10, “because of the angels” statement concerning women wearing head coverings.
This is not a presumption made on my part. It is established from 1. Scripture references (Ge 6:2; Nu 13:33; Ez 32:27) 2. Additional 2nd Temple Period Literature (Book of Enoch; Book of Jubilees, Dead Sea Scrolls, etc). As the Lexham Bible Dictionary points out, “Within the last 150 years, literary discoveries from the ancient Near East have resulted in the interpretation of Nephilim as nonhuman/semi-divine—the same understanding that dominated the intertestamental and early church eras.” The Targum Pseudo-Jonathan names the leaders of the fallen angels, the targumic traditions of Onqelos and Neofiti connect the Nephilim and the giants as did the LXX, and even Josephus sided with the angel view.
The Church Fathers held to the angelic view up until the 5th century (Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Cyprian, Ambrose, and Lactantius). There were a few reasons for the move away from this traditional interpretation. As the Pulpit Commentary puts it, the Sethite view was “…natural, and not monstorous.” Julius Africanus and Augustine tried to humanize this view. Later Luther and Calvin both would provide rationalization away from the angelic view. There seems to be a response of distaste to the angelic view after Africanus and Augustine. Many point to the prohibition of sex and marriage by Jesus in the afterlife (Ma 22:30; Mark 12:25), but this accounting never explicitly mentions capability. Likewise, what we will be like are the “good” angels that obey God, not the rebellious angels of Genesis 6:2.
2. The author makes a leap from some specific political events to Christian persecution. His discussion of the 2020 election, for example, seems to arise from the assumption that political liberalism is the antithesis of biblical Christianity. I don’t disagree, but the author should put more effort into proving that these events are the product of an intent to persecute the church, rather than the outworkings of political corruption broadly speaking.
I’m not certain what additionally could be provided other than just more articles from the public and political sphere stating the same things over and again that I already provided in the dissertation. I would actually argue that politicalism in general and not just the liberal branch is the antithesis of biblical Christianity. It does not matter if you are democrat or republican, liberal or conservative, if you are involved in the government affairs, you are a “beast of burden.” You will be doing a great deal and achieving very little. This is simply the nature of fallen man.
Likewise, I would not necessarily argue that the main aim of the liberal shift toward socialism is directly intended to persecute Christians. I think it is a natural bi-product of a deluded and corrupt and debased mind. I don’t believe those who are seeking to shift the US government will be able to help themselves but to mark Christians (among possible others) as the enemy of the state for so many various reasons.
The main connection I find between current events and Christian persecution is biblical prophecy. We know that Paul predicted there must first be a falling away from the faith. We also know that the United States is not mentioned in end times prophecy (subjectively so). We also know there will be persecution for the end times Church. Thirty years ago, as a new believer, I could not imagine a scenario where the US would give away it’s status and position in the world, where political and cultural norm would predicate a persecution against Christians. Today I can see this without any stretch of the imagination. It is already happening.
…………………
Received from Advisor on 7-16-21.
3. Comment and elaborate on partial preterism, postmillennialism, and a form of theonomy as a counter to your dissertation.
Partial Preterism asserts that many if not most of the prophecies in the Bible have already been fulfilled. It is an offshoot of full Preterism which argues that all prophecy and the second coming have been fulfilled. Full Preterism could be likened to the false teaching Paul was answering in 2 Th 2:1-12 where the believers in Thessalonia were under the impression that the Day of the Lord was “now” and that the resurrection had already occurred. Paul corrected them, citing that two events were required first before the Day of the Lord could occur: the falling away and the desolation of abomination.
Additionally, Preterists of all varieties have difficulty explaining the events predicted at the end have not occurred. Matt 24-25 and Re 6-18 state 1/3 of the stars fall from the sky, 1/3 of humans are destroyed, and all life in the oceans die. The only way this can be maintained is to allegorize it away.
If boiled down, the main issue with preterism of any stripe is the inconsistent interpretive application, or the consistent rejection of a straightforward, plain reading of the text. Some Preterists have gone so far afield as to state the word “literal” must appear before a statement in the bible before it can be interpreted literally. This simply opens up the entire Bible to be spiritualized and allegorized away, which, of course, is the point of preterism and all liberal hermenutics.
The same can be argued against postmillennialism. To say that most or all prophetic events have already been fulfilled from the Bible is to mock God and to render his plan weak and impotent. All one has to do is look around and see: it is evident that the world is not getting better but worse.
To argue that the millennium is an unspecified period of time between Christ’s resurrection and 2nd coming is to open up the Bible to interpretive fancy and to allow modernity and subjectivism full reign on the text. No longer do we need to wait and be watchful and pray. Instead, things are getting better and better all the time. How is it possible that the world will at some point usher in a Christian utopia when in many parts of the world Christians are imprisoned and tortured and killed, and in the West we are treated as idiots and morons?
Postmillenarrianism also rejects the promises made to ethnic Israel, or worse adopts those promises for themselves with their replacement theology. Paul is pretty clear in Romans 8-11 “all Israel will be saved.”
There are many Church Fathers who would argue against the postmill view: Papias, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Tertullian all reflected a premillennial theology.
Not only do postmillennials interpret Re 20:1-6 allegorically, they are free to interpret any part of Scripture the same way if they do not like what they can literally read. This is akin to the idealist approach, where anything and everything can be symbolized, spiritualized and storified. This, of course, really began with Origen, who was heavily influenced by Gnostic thinkers of his day. He not only preferred the spiritual over the physical, but he even considered humans to be in a karmic type of cycle between forms (angel, human, and demon) and considered the possibility of the devil one day experiencing salvation. This kind of allegoric thinking spread to Augustine and Aquinas, Luther and Calvin, all who accepted an amillennial viewpoint for their theologies. The postmillennial idea of some form of Theonomy taking over the planet and spreading Christianity through evangelism is a foreign concept to the plain, straightforward reading of the Bible.
To say that the modern Church is doing it right (doing anything right) is laughable. I could argue for the idea that the Church Christ is building happens to be found in the modern Church, but the modern Church certainly does not constitute Christ’s Church. His Church is also found in many other places, as his Church consists of people, of individuals, of living stones. The modern Church is an artifical construct of man, not the building of God. God help us all if the modern Church one day seizes control of the world. It will be a nightmare worse than death for both Christian and the lost.
One important draw that cannot be overlooked is the motivation for people to move away from premillennial thinking and toward a postmill theology. It is the desire for optimism. On several occasions now, I’ve heard accounts from those who have become postmillennialists did so because of their children or grandchildren. They could not stomach either having to teach their offspring the premill truth or could not accept that the future for their progeny would be full of suffering and dispair. By and large, postmillennialism tends to foster optimism for the world, for our current way of life. It provides hope in materialism, in economic prosperity and lends purpose for the amassing of wealth over time. Premillennialism, on the other hand, tends to lead one into a pessimistic mindset, where there is no purpose to look to the future, to plan for the future. Paul said it best, “the time is short, so that from now on even those who have wives should be as though they had none,” (1 Co 7:29). He was certainly expecting the return of Christ at any moment.
Additionally, Jesus said nothing about a world-wide conversion when speaking at length to his diciples. In fact, he described the opposite happening (Mt 28:19, 20; Mk 16:15; Lk 24:46–48; Acts 1:8). He told his apostles to go out into all the world and preach the gospel. He did not say they would accept it. He talked about them being hated on his account. He talked about them having to suffer for his sake.
In the end, it all depends on how you interpret Rev. 20:4–6. Do you take it historically? Figuratively? Futuristic? How you interpret the passage (and the rest of the Bible) will also depend a great deal on how you hold the Bible, either in high esteem or low esteem. Do you think it is the very Word of God, breathed out, and fit for doctrine, reproof, correction? Or do you presume that the writers, although well intentioned, were kind of simple minded ancient peoples who had their own cultural complexities to deal with, most of which have no bearing on the enlightened and advanced minds of modernity?
Likewise, I think a lot will depend on your particular station in life as well. Are you quite wealthy, have done well for yourself? That is a heavy burden to bear, for much is given much is required. You will not only be judged for what you say and do, for what you believe, but you will also be judged by every penny you spend and how you spend it. There is a reason you were given that money and it was not so you could live in comfort and luxury while the rest of the world lives in squalor.
If you have a wife and children, a husband and family, there is a tendency to find solace in postmillennialism simply because it boasts of a happier tomorrow on earth. Unfortunately, this is simply not present in the Bible but has to be read into it through allegory and spiritualizing away the parts that are contrary to it.
…………………..
Received from advisor 8-20-21.
[From undesignated committee member]
4. Please provide supporting evidence for a Trichotomist anthropology and against a Dichotomist anthropology.
The Bible does not actually define any kind of anthropology but simply assumes one. There is no chapter or passage that lays out, unequivically, the nature and fundamental essence of the human being, before or after the fall or even in the future immortal state. Rather, Jesus, the NT writers, and OT writers all accept one or more explanations for the makeup of the human being and, thus, only through a principled harmony and reconciliation of all relevant passages throughout the whole text can we determine what that theology was, or, at best, provide an educated guess.
Both views, Trichotomistic and Dichotomistic have have their defenders throughout church history. Mainly they have oscillated between the definitions of three distinct substances: the body (σῶμα), the soul (ψυχή), and the spirit (πνεῦμα).
The Committee member stated declaritively, “…There really is no basis for trichotomism and Steven merely assumes it…”
This is fundamentally and categorically incorrect. In the dissertation any assumption was based not on lack of evidence but on the necessity of brevity. I likewise assumed that Christianity was a valid worldview, in fact, I assumed in the writing that it was “the” valid worldview and that not only was it correct in its applicative teaching but that it was also correct in its predictive teaching as well (i.e. the prophecies would be fulfilled in the future).
To simply arrogate my assumption has no supporting evidence is quite presumptive itself. Rather, the trichotomic view has a rich and varied history of support within the universal church, especially in the early years. It was supported by the likes of Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Origen (though I’m not certain that is a net benefit), Didymus of Alexandria, Gregory of Nyssa, and Basil of Caesarea.
The committee member stated there are : “..two principal texts marshaled in defense of trichotomy (i.e., 1 Thess. 5:23, Heb. 4:12)”
This is actually incorrect as well. There are numerous references in the Bible that clearly indicate a trichotomic view of man. Examples are: Luke 1:46-47; Ps 104:29-30; 146:4; Jas 2:26; Job 33:4 and the JFB, UBS Handbooks, and Eerdmans are all in support of, at least to some degree, of a Trichotomic view.
The UBS Handbooks say of He 4:12, “What is intended by this figure of speech is to emphasize that the word of God penetrates deeply, so that there is nothing in the total personality which can possibly be hidden from the revealing nature of what God says.”
[Paul here is not actually speaking specifically of the dividing of the soul from the spirit. Rather, he is using the relevant fact (as they understood it), that the individual is made up of body, soul, and spirit, so that he could get across to their reader that the Word of God is so sharp it can separate that which is but for God inseprable. No human of their own volition can separate the soul from the spirit. We can barely cause our own deaths (and how much of that actually lies at independent human volition is debatable). In fact, we are reassured by Jesus that it is impossible for another human to harm an individual’s soul (and apparently the soul and spirit are intricately tethered, although fundamentally distinct) (Matt 10:28)
What is crucial to understand is not that the Word of God can do this (though important in its own right), but to Paul the Trichotomic view was common enough knowledge to use it as an example to illustrate his point.]
Further Dr. Heiser states in the Faithlife Study Bible on a Biblical Anthropology, “For example, Heb 4:12 refers to the Word of God’s ability to “divide the soul and spirit.” However, this does not indicate an actual division between soul and spirit. Rather, the verse claims that the Word of God can penetrate the inner person in such a way—not that such a division exists prior to its work. Soul and spirit are no more separated in Heb 4:12 than “bone and marrow” of the same verse.”
[As he interprets this passage, so do many dichotomists. Not only does it violate a plain, straightforward reading of the text (bringing in presuppositions and is eisegesis), but he assumes that bone and marrow are not separable (which they are) and he misses the point Paul is making in the allusion from “soul and spirit” to “bone and marrow.” Separating bone and marrow is a very, very difficult task. It was done by some cultures as marrow was a good source of nutrients. But marrow is the core of the bone itself and the place where it comes together is difficult for humans to assertain. The same is true for the place where the soul and the spirit come together. They are so intricately tethered together that only God could divide them with the sharpest of knives. All this, of course, to say, the Word of God does likewise to the individual, laying them open to the core constituent parts before God (we can see this in action in 1 Co 14:24).]
Pulpit Commentary states of 1 Th 5:23, “The apostle here divides human nature into three parts—spirit, soul, and body; and this threefold division is not a mere rhetorical statement…but a distinct statement of the three component parts of human nature. The “spirit” is the highest part of man, that which assimilates him to God; renders him capable of religion, and susceptible of being acted upon by the Spirit of God. The “soul” is the inferior part of his mental nature, the seat of the passions and desires, of the natural propensities. The “body” is the corporeal frame. Such a threefold distinction of human nature was not unknown among the Stoics and Platonists. There are also traces of it in the Old Testament, the spirit, or breath of God, being distinguished from the soul.”
Eerdmans Commentary on 1 Th 5:23 states, “This benediction emphasizes that the whole person of believers, their body, soul, and spirit, must be kept in holiness and integrity until the parousia. In contrast to those who adopted the Greco-Roman mind-set, reflected in the behavior of the ataktoi, which tended to give the spirit priority over the body, Paul hopes for the sanctification of the whole person.”
[This idea of giving the spirit priority over the body is very similar to what many in modern evangelicalism have done today. They render the spiritual as some kind of ethereal realm, almost fantasy, and consider it our final destination while still remaining less-than the physical.]
JFB states of 1 Th 5:23, “All three, spirit, soul, and body, each in its due place, constitute man “entire.””
UBS Handbooks state of 1 Th 5:23, “This is the only place in which Paul makes the threefold distinction: spirit, soul, and body…Luther seems to think that the first includes the second and third: “your whole spirit, together with soul and body,” but this sense is unlikely. It is clear from the context that spirit is here a part or aspect of human nature, that the Holy Spirit is not referred to.”
[This is not a while eyed interpretation. It is established in both older and modern commentaries and, though does vary in degree, is often found presented even if the author disagrees because it is a common view. Arguments against the Trochotomic view is often difficult to follow. One argument states that Ge 2:7 limits the creation of man to the dust of the earth and breath of life. But it actually includes all three elements: the dust of the earth (body), breath of life (spirit), and the soul which indwells the living being (there cannot be a living being without all three).]
Dualistic anthropology arose from the OT according to Christ’s/Paul’s reading of Exod. E.g., Matt. 22.
I would argue that a dichotomic anthropology arose from and is maintained by some bizarre need within Christianity to insist on “spirit” being immaterial and that God and the angels are somehow without form and ethereal. A Trichotomic view necessitates a rejoining of the three at the resurrection, while many dichotomists would be just as happy with no physical resurrection only a spiritual one.
Likewise, to say trichotomy is error because of its abuse by cults is simply guilt by ill-informed association and such tactics would render all Christian doctrine unusable since every doctrine has been perverted one way or another throughout the centuries.
The reality is, it is not that the words “soul” and “spirit” are synonymous, but they are used today synonymously. It is presupposition being anachronistically read back into the text to assuage modern Christian sensitivity and uncomfortability with biblical truth.
Just like the doctrine of the Trinity would be aggressively defended, even though it is not presented concretely in any single passage, so to the Trichotomic view is evident throughout the text.
In Ecc 12:7, “…the dust will return to the earth as it was, And the spirit will return to God who gave it.” From this statement we clearly see the direction of two elements that make up the “living being” of Genesis 2:7. We can see clearly in Genesis 35:18 that the soul does indeed depart and is separated from the body at death, and Luke 16:19ff provides the destination for the dead (either Hades in Torment or Hades in Paradise or simply Paradise).
The very nature and purpose of death is a consequence and penalty for sin. It is, by its very nature, unnatural to how the original human was designed (and subsequently how we should be). I can only imagine death will be an extremely traumatic event and its state will be foreign, unnatural, and unsettling at best for the whole of its duration.
It is clear there is a self which remains unchanged throughout the duration of life for the “living being.” The true and essential and accurately depicted nature of the “living being” or its constituent parts that actually make up that “living being” are, aside from the glimpses given in the Bible, completely unknown and most likely unknowable to the human entity. We are constrained by Scripture to harmonize all portions into a the greatest whole available to us and pray this is enough to get the picture we need of the elemental and disparate realities of existence.
Interestingly enough, in his book Are People Basically Good?, Sproul made an incredible comment, “Theologically, we recognize that the Holy Spirit can distinguish between spirits, souls, minds, and consciences, but to simplify it, the church has said that there is a physical dimension to our lives and a nonphysical one.”
This is quite a fantastic statement. It assumes that humans are incapable of discerning spiritual truth from the Scripture for themselves without the Church having to dumb it down for them, and Sproul here is clearly admitting the fundamental reality of biblical anthropology is Trichotomic (at least from the perspective of the Holy Spirit), but that only those of a divine state can discern such distinctions.
In Conclusion:
Not only is the Trihotomic view clearly seen throughout the Bible, but it was also predominate in the writings of the Early Church, and is clearly seen to be viewed (though often and oddly warily) by modern scholars and theologians. Yet, many would argue ferociously against it, defending instead a kind of quasi-Gnosticism, alluding to the physical being bad and the spiritual, ethereal plane being better or somehow more holy or pure.
But, even if the terms “soul” and “spirit” are used interchangeably in the Bible, how does this discredit the view that these two terms do in other places concretely define elemental segments that conjointly constitute the “living being?” Even if only one verse could be found that states the Trichotomic view, would this not have to be harmonized with the rest of Scripture? Of course, this is not what is done in modern theology. Instead, the knee-jerk response is typically to allegorize the trouble passage away.
5. Please clarify what you refer to when you say “oracles of God” on pg 175. Are you referring to the OT or the philosophy of men?
The Oracles of God are mentioned two times in the Bible, both by Paul when meaning this specific definition (Peter and Samuel mention “oracle” and “oracles” but are here referring to individuals rather than what Paul is referring to). These Oracles are the whole of the Scripture. They are the full declaration of God.
Paul’s first use of it is in Romans 3:1-2, “What advantage then has the Jew, or what is the profit of circumcision? Much in every way! Chiefly because to them were committed the oracles of God.”
The second use was in Hebrews 5:12, “For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles of the oracles of God.”
This is the fundamental collection of God’s revelation to man. In Paul’s time, it would have consisted of the Old Testament and maybe some of the 2nd Temple Period writings such as the Book of Enoch. It might also have included some parts of the New Testament writings, depending on what had been written before Paul’s comments listed above. It certainly would have included the oral teachings of Jesus and the apostles. Then again, there is a possibility it would be strictly limited to the Old Testament and 2nd Temple Period writings since Paul references “to them were committed” meaning the Jewish people. This, though, could incorporate the NT writings as well, since they came predominately from the Jews also.
The Romans reference mentions nothing about what the oracles are, but only to whom the oracles were entrusted. It is the Hebrews reference that elaborates to some degree. Paul makes it clear, within the oracles of God are a subset called “first principles,” or that which are the basic fundamentals of the faith.
In comparison, the oracles of God have nothing to do with the philosophy of men. In the Bible these are often called “doctrines of men,” “doctrines of the Pharisees,” “doctrines of the Nicolaitans,” “doctrines of Balaam,” and even “doctrines of demons,” though I’m not certain if these should be categories as supernatural doctrines rather than doctrines originating from humans. Then again, all doctrines of men could likewise has influence from the demonic realm, since the origin of evil and sin can ultimately be traced back to a supernatural motivation.
Philosophy and scientism, socery, and witchcraft, even outright atheism, are all examples of the philosophy of men. Everyone ascribes to a wordview of one form or another. Even those who insist they are not religious ascribe to some form of ethical system. These systems apart from God and divergent from the Word of God are futile and a lie.
Philosophy of men may contain some elements of truth, but only the word of God is actually and accurately truthful.
6. Please justify your use of secondary sources when quoting the patristic martyrs rather than the original sources. Please include references to this debate in the academic community.
As illustrated by this stack exchange…
It is pretty clear this is a contentious topic and there is no single right or wrong answer, at least not definitively defined. Here is my rationale for utilizing secondary sources rather than primary.
1. Since everyone in academia is responsible to properly cite sources it stands to reason that secondary sources are just as trustworthy as primary ones. But, since citation itself is a means of holding people accountable, when citing a secondary source that is citing a primary source, there is still a clear trail leading back to the original work being cited. Certainly, if I came across a quote in a secondary source that seemed wrong in some way, I would investigate it. This is true for the reader as well. But, since reading secondary sources is how much of knowledge is developed in academia, it is ludicrous not to allow it’s citation. The same is true of online sources like Wikipedia. I would much rather a student cite suspect (or potentially suspect) material so I know how to verify its verasity, than simply outlaw it outright and so the student uses the source anyway and falsifies the citation.
Much of this argument can be eliminated by proper selection of secondary sources to begin with. This not only requires the determination of author credibility but also having a body of secondary sources so many voices speak on the same subject.
The concern that the secondary source author has “processed” the quote in some way is illogical given that it is a quote. A quote should be exact, word for word, and not processed. It is possible that the quote has been lifted from its context and incorrectly applied. I have seen this in many texts, especially in Protestant circles when quoting the Church Fathers. These theologians and scholars are notorious for using the words of the Church Fathers to say things that they never said.
7. Please elaborate on the political section and provide reason for why it is valuable to the dissertation as a whole. Your claims about a stolen election appear to be neither objective nor evidential.
The political section, along with the sections on the supernatural realms, and death provide essential background material to make the case that persecution is, in fact, coming for Christians in the United States. Not only can this be seen in the run-up and results of the 2020 Presedential elections, but such claims have been confirmed by the illegal and unconstitutional acts committed by the new regime.
Before, during, and after the election, there were two basic narratives being propogated. 1. the election was stolen. 2. the election was legitimate and those claiming it was stolen are nazis, mentally ill, and racist. Number 2 was in response to #1. Despite widespread allegations and corroboration of evidence for massive fraud, for illegal removal of opposition from polling stations, from mysterious mass dumping of “ballots” in the last few hours of the polls closing, all were ignored. Last minute lawsuits were unanimously shut down by the courts based not on merit but on procedure, rendering the courts useless to save what was left of democracy.
It is now evident what the plan was. Those behind the scenes ushered in a talking head president who has no authority, no atonomy, and no integrity and then proceeded to release a virus on the globe to usher in the new world order. The elites have seized power, have overthrown the constitution and the bill of rights, and we will soon (already are) seeing the trampling of religious freedoms.
There are now two distinct groups of people across the globe. There are the “purebloods” of the elite social and economic stratus, and then the masses. They will and are already in the process of unleashing tracking and mass surveillance systems which will be so strict we will not be able to buy or sell without taking their “passport.” The virus and the vaccines have been engineered so as to bring about carnage and death to reduce the population by at least 15% and categorize people as compliant and non-compliant to government demands. Those who are non-compliant will soon be rounded up and placed in camps and either worked, experimented on, starved to death, or outright murdered.
How does one source events that are happening on the cusp of world events? There are no academic articles, no books published on the subject. There are only news reports and opinion columns, blog posts, and podcast episodes. These are cited routinely in support of my claims.
As to neutrality and objectivity, it was the aim in this section to present background reasons for why persecution was coming to America. This limited scope demanded brevity in the support subsections so I could focus the majority of the argument on the main thesis. This is typical in research writing and I do not know any other way to complete the subsections. There were many other elements left out in the supernatural section and in the death section, but these two subjects are very well documented and have been discussed at length for most of human history.
Determined by the limitations of the project, certain assumptions are unavoidable in research.
8. Elaborate on your process for citation style use as it appears you have used neither Turabian or any other standardized style.
I would beg to differ. I utilized examples of Turabian both in the prescribed manual and in online examples. I also standardized the style I used throughout the text to my best effort. During the research process, I did notice there were some wide variances being used from authority to authority, all covered under Turabian. I chose to use the short note format since I was including a full bibliography. This was executed exactly as prescribed in the manual and online examples. I’m not certain what I could have done differently, save for using a citation format that was more to the liking of the committee members (or covered topics and presented conclusions that were more comfortable to their theological dispositions).
………….
Received from advisor on 8-25-21.
This email included a pdf copy of my dissertation with hand written notes from my advisor. Instead of posting the notes or the full document, I am opting to post only those notes I am addressing. Many of the notes were grammatical or simply comments, etc which have here been skipped. Grammar issues should have been resolved when the document was run through Grammarly on the last edit.
1. I argue on pg 10 that the US was founded on a secular or diestic respect for all religions rather than a sacralist or theocracy. My advisor’s comment was this is debatable.
I will provide several quotes from the founding fathers concerning this matter.
In a letter written to the Danbury Baptists on January 1, 1802, Thomas Jefferson stated, “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. “
James Madison wrote in his letter to Edward Everett on March 19, 1823, “….There are causes in the human breast, which ensure the perpetuity of religion without the aid of the law; that rival sects, with equal rights, exercise mutual censorships in favor of good morals; that if new sects arise with absurd opinions or over-heated maginations, the proper remedies lie in time, forbearance and example; that a legal establishment of religion without a toleration could not be thought of, and with toleration, is no security for public quiet and harmony, but rather a source itself of discord and animosity; and, finally, that these opinions are supported by experience, which has shewn that every relaxation of the alliance between law and religion…has been found as safe in practice as it is sounds in theory. Prior to the Revolution, the Episcopal Church was established by law in this State. On the Declaration of Independence it was left, with all other sects, to a self-support. And no doubt exists that there is much more of religion among us now than there ever was before the change; and particularly in the sect which enjoyed the legal patronage. This proves rather more than, that the law is not necessary to the support of religion.”
The U.S. Treaty No. 122, “The Treaty of Tripoli,” Clause 11, which was negotiated by George Washington’s administration and signed by John Adams, and was then unanimously ratified in 1797 states, “As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion, as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen…it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.”
Interestingly, Benjamin Franklin commented on the development of the professional clergy in his letter to Richard Price on October 9, 1780, “If Christian Preachers had continued to teach as Christ and his Apostles did, without Salaries, and as the Quakers now do, I imagine Tests would never have existed; for I think they were invented, not so much to secure Religion itself, as the Emoluments of it. When a Religion is good, I conceive that it will support itself; and when, it cannot support itself, and God does not take care to support, so that its Professors are oblig’d to call for help of the Civil Power, it is a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.”
These quotes above clearly show it is not a question how the United States was founded or how religion played a role, and if that religious freedom exemplified in the Constitution and Bill of Rights was centralized on Christianity or was extended to all religions and philosophies.
2. I stated on pg 11 that at the founding of the Constitution for the first time in human history the ability to worship freely was granted to all religions within American borders, and this freedom sparked both religious revival and economic expansion. My advisor stated this was a questionable interpretation.
It is actually the very fact that there is religious freedom in the US that America has prospered over the last several decades. It is Religious Freedom that prevents a minority of individuals from seizing control and forcing their beliefs and whims onto the overall populous. That is, of course, until now. I predict there will be a continual slide toward authoritarianism in the US and around the world and this will lead to the eventual eradication of personal freedom and will result in a decline and ultimate destruction of the modern church and the rise of a single world leader.
Religious freedom has allow individuals to chart their own destinies combined with freedom of movement and respect for private ownership. This has blossomed as an massive economic expansion over the last two centuries. Ruled by the people with no king, though this has, in the last few decades, been eroded and compromised predominately by indoctrination in public education. The new generation (Millennials) are now oriented toward socialism and are by and large handing over their freedoms and their rights to the wealthy elites.
Once religious liberty is gone, so too will economic prosperity go with it.
4. Pg 16 I state that most of the body of christ have become the forgotten of the faith. He wanted to know the meaning of this.
This is actually a reference to a point made in a book on persecution, where the author was explaining that the American Church in particular has all but forgotten the rest of Christianity around the globe. When I say “most of the body of Christ have become the forgotten of the faith” I mean on any given Sunday in any given modern evangelical meeting, lips service at best is paid to the persecuted church. Many if not most American christians would be aghast as some of the beliefs and practices of other sectors of the faithful. American Christianity is utterly out of touch and has no framework from which to comprehend what it is like for most of Christianity to come to the faith under persecution, to live under persecution, and to actually suffer long-term and even die for one’s faith. This is common place to many generations of Christians, yet American believers think it odd even somehow ungodly to suffer for their testimony.
5. pg 17 I argue that it would be difficult to find sermons in America today on persecution. His comment says it depends on whether expositional or topical sermons.
I would argue with this counter. I think it would be difficult to find sermons today in American Christian pulpits that explicitly deal with persecution as something common to the Christian community (rather than the unfortunate exception), and even fewer leaders willing to teach congregations in America to prepare for future persecution to come. I don’t think the type of sermon has any bearing, especially if one tends to think postmillennially and preiteristically, then no matter what passage comes into view, it can easily be wiped away from relevance by quick use of allegory or flippantly lyrics explaining it was fulfilled in 70 A.D.
6. pg 17 I state there was a shift as settlers populated the American landscape and turned from their persecution roots in the revolution and toward their own affairs. He states this is explained by post mill eschatology.
Yes, this would be correct. If many or most of the settlers and puritans were postmillennial, then it stands to reason they would find no reason to concern themselves with the persecution theology of the past. Their view would be that Christ was already reigning from heaven, that Satan was already bound in the pit for a 1000 allegorical years (unspecified length of time), and that the gospel should be implemented into a perfect theonomy that would encircle the globe, socially and ethically lift the human race, and only then would Christ return to a glorious kingdom built by his faithful disciples. Of course, this did not happen, is not happening, and the world is most clearly getting increasingly worse as time goes on, to the point that societies are imploding under the weight of corruption, moral depasement, and a continued fulfillment of Ge 6:5.
Despite the overarching error of postmillennialism eschatology, it does provide explanation to the comment made in the dissertation, simply because the settlers at that time believed incorrectly that they were in the millennium.
7. pg 18 He asks if persecution is normal? Pre-constantine yes. Middle ages, no. Reformation, depends. Post-reformation, depends. modern times, depends.
Is persecution normal? Paul seemed to think so. So did Jesus. They seemed rather certain that if you were a Christian you would suffer persecution (2 Ti 3:12; Acts 14:22; Ma 5:10-12; 10:16-33; Lu 14:26-27; Jo 15:19-21; 16:2, 33). As you pointed out, the intensity of persecution comes and goes, but for much of the church universal it is a common occurance. It is only the Western culture and most explicitly American evangelical Christianity that assumes Christianity is akin to prosperity and capitalism.
9. pg 19 He asks if holiness demands persecution? Cannot holiness also be tested by ease as well?
There are certain statements made by both Jesus and Paul that cannot be ignored. In Jn 13:35, Jesus states, “By this all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.” We find the example of the local church for us to emulate in Acts 4:32–35 (the only modern example that comes close is the cenobitic monastery and some communal living communities), and again description of the Christian 1 Jn 3:10-14; 4:21; and in Acts 14:22, “We must through many tribulations enter the kingdom of God.”
It is not possible to test holiness by persecution or ease. Jehovah’s Witnesses were persecuted with the Jews in Nazi Germany but that does not mean their holiness is valid. The same can be said for any individual Christian. God alone is the test for holiness (Pr 17:3). Persecution, at least in the mind of the apostles, was a gift and a blessing. What about ease? 1 Th 5:3 explains this mentality, “For when they say, “Peace and safety!” then sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant woman. And they shall not escape.”
It was pretty clear in the mind of Jesus and Paul that to be a Christian is to be persecuted. We have evidence to the contrary, of course, especially in the western world in modern times. But, is this an aberration? Is the American church unique in history and soon to plunge headlong into persecution? Only time wil tell. As Chuck Missler quips, “If America is never punished for her apostacy, then God will owe Sodom and Gomorrah an apology.”
10. pg 20 I state it is the call of every christian to abandon this world and all the attachments therin. He asks is it our call to abandon or to conquer?
I would argue it is our call to abandon this world (Matt 13:22) since we are but pilgrims and strangers on the earth (He 11:13). We are presumably not of this world (Jn 15:19). If you mean by conquer to “overcome” it is actual Jesus who has overcome the world (Jn 16:33). But our small part to be played is done so by our faith (1 Jn 5:4; Jn 6:29). Paul and John both tell us (not to build a global theocracy but) that this world is passing away (1 Co 7:31; 1 Jn 2:17).
11. pg 22 I state “the west and America.” He wants to know if these two are synonymous.
They are synonymous only in that America is the primary catalyst for how Western culture appears and functions. If looking around the globe one can see an almost homogeneous quality to daily life regardless of the culture it is found in. America defines predominately how western culture appears. So, not synonymous as there are cultures that are western but not American, yet all western culture is influenced by American culture.
12. pg 22 he wants to know what proof there is that the american church has decayed.
There are several layers to this statement. First, and most superficially, church buildings are being abandoned in droves. As was done in Europe many decades ago, America has witnessed a sharp decline in those who are religiously affiliated. Many simply leave the faith altogether and fewer converts take their place. This has caused many mainline demoninational churches to simply close their doors and liquidate their assets.
The church I was baptized in in Germany closed due to charismaniac chaos that crept in after the founding pastor left and a new one was brought over from the States. Subsequently, the solid congregants simply left and the church body was hollowed out.
A rural church in a previous town I lived in had experienced the same kind of takeover. A new pastor stepped in, drove out the core believers, leaving fanaticals to mind the store.
Today, in my current town, I have seen two churches close since I moved here. One charismatic church (it’s located in the old town district so has no exposure) and a mainline church (I think it was Methodist or Presbyterian) simply closed and the local hospital purchased the building and turned it into a business office.
The second layer is the eroding of the clergy. Many are coming out of seminary with a BA or MDiv in church growth and marketing rather than in theology. During my search for a graduate program I discovered most seminaries today do not teach the Bible. They teach human wisdom, pop psychology, and how to offend the least amount of people to maximize profits and growth. This has simply created a Nicolaitan type monster in a clergy that stands for nothing and will allow anything as long as the numbers are good and moving in the right direction.
The third layer is the lukewarm nature of the congregations. Two accounts provide ample description of this. Many years ago I served for a short time with a man who called himself a servant of God. He was living at a church and was there during the day when the sewing club met. He recalled to me an incident when he overheard one of the prominent women in the church telling all the others that it was fine to go to church on Sundays, but everything else would take a backseat to how she felt at any given moment. Her basic gist was, she would be determining the plan going forward for her not God.
The second account was a pastor who presented a decision that needed to be made to the elder board. The pastor stated, “If we go with option A then family X and Y will certainly leave the church. If we go with option B then family W and Z will leave.” After the pastor was finished, one of the elders turned to him and said, “This is a simple decision. What are the tithing histories of all four families? We go with the one decision that will not offend the families that give the most.”
Though the accounts above are enough to firmly establish the decay of the American Church, or even possibly support the claim that the church is extremely unhealthy and operates unbiblically, it is really not the soul of the problem. This paradigm in which the American church operates is one based solely on capitalism and nationalism and not on the Bible. In fact, the closest expression to a biblical church I’ve ever seen is a cenobitic monastery. Unfortunately, these are in latter times such as this, dying in droves. Two of the three protestant monasteries I’ve looked at have now closed. Yet another one I was looking at in Colorado has suspended its initiate program due to dwindling numbers.
Lastly, in a discussion I had awhile back with an acquaintance who was also a Christian, she stated she had terrible addictive issues with spending money, shopping, and debts. I asked her if the Church couldn’t help her in some way. She responded in a shocked tone, “They have no idea about any of this. I would never want them to find out!” I would argue she is either not part of a true church or not being honest with the other members of the body.
The American Church is not biblical. Even it’s strong points that got it to this time and place have failed and the entire institution is now beginning to crack and crumble under the weight of its own malformation.
13. pg 23 He wants examples of non-biblical reasons for people leaving the churches in modern times.
As Pew’s Research Study finds 50% of non-affiliated said they left because of science. Many even said “I’m a scientist now, I don’t believe in miracles.” Many other invoked “common sense,” “logic,” and Christianity’s “lack of evidence” as their reason for leaving. Some said the church was too much like a business while others cited sexual abuse scandals by clergy. Hypocrisy was a big reason, as those who left said they saw Christians at the bar on Friday and Saturday night and in the pew on Sunday morning.
A major driving force for younger people is the indoctrination they have received in public education. Any biblical stance against alternative lifestyles is viewed as a non-starter.
14. pg 23 He wants examples of how schools have degrated into institutions of indoctrination rather than centers of learning.
News reports are replete with examples of institutional indoctrination. These public institutions are actively working with politicians to sever parental rights over children and award the young to the state (while the parents are still responsible for the financial costs). CRT is being forced into public school education across the country, students are interviewed by faculty to uncover perceived violations by parents, and cancel culture places immense pressure on children to fit in and comply with mob rule.
An entirely new generation has been raised to believe that socialism is a better system of government than capitalism, and Christianity is nothing more than myth.
15. pg 23 He wants proof that the americna church is desperate for approval and to be accepted by the secular culture.
All one has to do is look at the multitude of pastors who have swallowed CTR and progressive theology and the number of seminaries around the country who have likewise determined that intersectionalty is okay as long as it does not hamper profitability. It is commonly accepted today that unless you are non-white, non-straight, and non-male you will have no chance of getting a job in academia or in a popular seminary. Take a pole of the number of white pastors who are apologizing publicly for being white and you will have all the evidence you need.
16. pg 23 I state that post-western religion and a compromised culture will overtake the globe in coming generations. He offers that this might bring about counter-movement. Is this possible?
I actually expect it to excite a counter-movement, but I think by the time they are lulled awake from their slumber it will be too late. Currently the elites are using the pandemic to divide and categorize the masses. Once they know all the religious objectors, they will begin the round up process. I think they will be forced into camps and silenced or killed on a mass scale. Then the true indoctrination will begin of those who are left. There will be a revolt, but it will not be successful. Never before has there been a global power structure in the hands of a few with the technological advancements available to actually monitor everything people say and do.
17. pg 24 I state that there is no education in churches for congregates to learn how or prepare to endure persecution. More often than not they simply walk away from the faith. He wants proof of this.
The nones of no religious affiliation are said to comprise a third self-professing atheists, a third of those who profess to be agnostic, and another third don’t know. This is the result of poor education or a lack of genuine discipleship in the churches today.
18. pg 24. I use china as an example. he wants to know if Chinese Christians were trained beforehand. Is training necessary?
It was stated in the dissertation that many Chinese Christians undergo training for persecution. They are taught how to get out of handcuffs, how to flee, and how to hide from authorities. I would say they were not trained “beforehand” simply because they did not know persecution.
First missionaries arrived in China in 635 AD. Two hundred years later persecution began. From that point forward it swayed back and forth between acceptance, toleration, and persecution. Civil war broke out in 1925 and resulted in communism taking over around 1949. The Christian church was replaced by the state sponsored cult of Mao. In the 60-s and 70’s China underwent the Cultural Revolution to purge capitalists and traditionalists.
In answer to the question of whether training is necessary, I am conflicted. On the one hand, I would say the handwriting is on the wall and the ink is still fresh. But, I doubt the Christian community in America will heed the warning. Should I even teach persecution training? Write a book? Should I be encouraging people to learn to live off the land, to hide, to flee? Or should I just train myself in preparation for what ever God has in store for me to do when western society finally collapses and the new world order is established?
I’m currently debating if I should go into hiding when the time calls for it or if I should simply live a quiet life, at peace as much as it is in my control and wait for them to come for me, which is what Polycarp did.
20. pg 26 I state more so now than ever before it is evident that persecution will come for us all. He wants proof of this.
Daniel 2:41-42; 7:16-24 and Revelation 13 all establish a one world government that will be headed by the antichrist and this leader will wage war against Christians. He is empowered by Satan and anyone who takes the mark of the beast will be guaranteed a place in the Lake of Fire (Revelation 14:10–11). Paul tells us two signs that must come first before the resurection and Christ’s return. 1. The falling away 2. The Man of Sin is revealed 3. he will declare himself God and will sit in the temple of God as God (2 Th 2:3).
Now, the antichrist has not yet been revealed. The mark of the beast has not been established. But, who can deny how suspicious the global elites’ response has been to the COVID pandemic? With great hostility they promote and push this vaccine that Moderna has stated is a biological operating system that can be used for numerous other “things” in the future. Now news reports are claiming the vaccines are necessary software upgrades for the human being. The government officials keep pushing radical agendas, keep gnashing their teeth at Christian opposition even though it is clearly evident the vaccines are not working and there is an unrelated ulterior motive for pushing it. The elites have all but destroyed the global economy, have certainly ensured future hyper-inflation that will wipe out the savings of the middle class and are now moving to render those against the vaccines as unemployable (hence, soon, they will not be able to buy or sell).
The American courts have proven spineless and will soon be diluted. Elections will never be fair and impartial (if they ever were to begin with). After the 2020 election, it is clear there will never again be a conservative president. Not even a faux conservative like Trump. The borders have been left wide open with illegals being trucked and dispersed throughout the country. These individuals will dilute the American populous and will eventually swing the red states toward socialism. Social media has all but eradicated outspoken conservative voices. The last generation of children raised in America have been utterly and completely indoctrinated toward socialism.
I would wager 5 years and it will be illegal to publicly discuss the Bible or give a testimony of God. Christians will be branded as radicals, fanaticals, racists, and carriers of disease and hate. It will soon be against the law to be a Christian. They will either be rounded up and put into camps and exterminated, worked (and their assets seized and redistributed), or they will be pushed to the fringes of society to starve to death.
If this is the beginning of the NWO and this global government is or will one day be headed by the antichrist, then Christians are obligated to resist their plans (not by violence, but by “the blood of the Lamb and by their testimony” (Re 12:11).
22. pg 27 wants to know if there are any books on reasons why the american church has developed no theology of persecution.
I could find a few websites that discussed the previous persecution experienced in Europe that drove settlers to American colonies. But it appears as if Reformation and later Enlightenment thinking sparked the concept of tolerance.
The early days of the colonies and into the new country found a theocracy of sorts. Only Christians could hold public office (meaning non-catholics). Jews did not have full civil rights in Maryland. In Delaware you had to take an oath supporting the Trinity. Massachusetts and South Carolina has state supported churches. When the founding fathers came on the scene, they inked documents that protected the rights of all religions and separate the state from having any involvement or encroachment on any. In fact, they were suspect of state sponsored religious affiliation because they knew that governments turn on a whim and a pro-Christian government today could quickly turn to an anti-Christian government tomorrow. Madison noted that Christianity spread in the face of persecution from a worldly government not from its help.
When the Virginia Act for Establishing Religious Freedom was approved in 1786, Jefferson remarked that it was meant for “the Jew, the Gentile, the Christian and the Mahometan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.”
I would argue this secular founding and separation between church and state (to protect all religious and non religious alike from the state) laid the groundwork of peace and tranquility (i.e. no religious persecution) and the church and her theologians within a few generations turned their attention to other business (persecuting Catholics, Jews, and Mormons, etc).
Christians have been free from nearly the founding of the country 250 years ago to worship however they choose (within orthodoxical reason). This allowed them to simply move on from persecution to ecclesiology and harmatology. After the world wars with its immense amount of bloodshed and suffering, the Church sought stability and safety. In the 60’s and 70’s the Church closed ranks against the counterculture movement, fortifying its fundamentalism or also embracing the secular culture through compromise. In the post-modern era today the Church has fully embraced comsumerism, marketing, commercialization of faith, and has dispensed with pure and established doctrinal positions. It has replaced the gospel of Christ with psychological positivism and self-help goblgocary.
23. pg 27. I state the american church does not view persecution as purposeful. He wants to know who denies it has purpose?
This article talks about the tendency of American Christianity to turn a blind eye to the persecutions happening in other countries. The author states persecution events are underreported because reporters don’t want to be viewed as @#$-phobic (take your pick). She states many churches have turned inward due to the recession. She also states American Christianity is at war with the secular culture in which it lives (i.e. liberal progressivism).
But, I do believe my advisor is referencing a quote I pulled form one of the sources I had on persecution. It stated that “only in America do Christians pray for persecution in China to cease when Chinese Christians pray for persecution to continue.”
I think this is a very valid point made by the source. I also would argue that on any given Sunday in America I would have a difficult time finding a church that thought persecution was relevant to them, when it boiled down to it, they would consider persecution either 1. a consequence of personal sin 2. judgment on a person, a church, or a country 3. something that should be prayed away or avoided at all cost. Suffering is likewise dealt with the same way, though the majority of evangelicals would say “to be away from the body is to be present with the Lord” yet how hard do most fight to cling to the last scraps of life in the end?
24. pg 27. He asks if persecution should be pursued?
This is a very tough question. It was certainly pursued by some in the early church. It was and is still pursued, if even indirectly, by missionaries who go into harms way or native believers who go against their government mandates to spread the gospel. It is a question I am currently wrestling with myself. Do I, if/when persecution does come, flee and go somewhere else where there is no persecution? Or do I remain here, and simply present myself to the authorities as a Christian to be persecuted and marytred? Do I have an obligation to God and to his provision to simply live out my life in quiet and peace, affording opportunity for God to work through me as he sees fit until the point in which the authorities no longer allow me to do so? Less so, do I have an obligation to take up arms against an oppressive government, try to retaliate, to overthrow them, to thwart them? It would be interesting to note if postmillennialists would say it is the Christian responsibility to fight oppressive governments.
25. pg 28 I state there is no actual persecution happening today in America. He comments mild vs hot persecution.
This is a difficult thing to determine. Are American Christians under persecution? No. Not mild persecution. None. They might be the butt of jokes. There might be discrimination, whether that’s from coworkers, employers, or certainly in the educational setting today. But, as stated in the dissertation, there is no actual, aggressive, persistent persecution of Christians…yet. That’s the point. I predict and supported in my research that persecution is not only coming to American Christians but that those believers are ill prepared for it, having spent most if not their entire faith without it and with little to no training about it.
26. pg 35 I made a statement concerning choice of NKJV over others. He asks why this text and not ecclectic?
I provided some explanation in the dissertation, but let me elaborate. Once I was turned away from Buddhism (direct revelation) I was given a desire to read the Bible. I first started with the NKJV (didn’t realize it at the time) in a pocket Gideon Bible. By the time I got to Germany (about 2 years later) I was trying to read a KJV and intensely disliked it. I was turned onto the NIV by a missionary and subsequently spent about 6 months reading the Bible cover to cover. After the military I discovered the KJV-only controversy. After researching it I came away convinced that the modern translations were being tampered with, watered down. The evidence was pretty clear. Motives not as clear. But I knew I wanted the equivalent of my NIV Bible (CT in line and MT in notes) only flipped (MT in line and CT in notes). I eventually found this in the NKJV. I now use the NKJV for devotional and study, but augment with multiple other translations as well. I also do not use physical printed books but digital in Logos.
I am very skeptical and suspicious of humans. I think they are, as a whole, broadly, liars and theives. They are undependible and unredeemable. In fact, if it were up to me, there would be no saving grace. If I were God I would wipe the slate clean and start over from the beginning (or learn my lessons and remain alone for eternity).
So, this is how I approach modern translations. I accept the LXX/MT. This is an eclectic combination as is. But I do so because I think the manuscripts underneath the CT were improperly edited by Gnostics and later by modernists and liberals. I accept the LXX over the Masoretic because the NT writers quoted from it about 60% of the time (or more). Though, in practical terms, I use the Masoretic in my English translation (NKJV) and refer to the LXX during study. My exegesis reports in Logos are automatically geared toward the LXX though. I dislike the Masoretic because it is late dated and has evidence of impropriety by the Jews trying to thwart the OT use by Christians.
All this to say, I don’t trust anyone. I believe the Bible is God-breathed, inerrant in the originals, infallible in most translations, and reliable in all but a few versions to bring about spiritual transformation (God can actually do anything). But, we are to show ourselves approved, rightly dividing the word. If man’s hands have been all over the biblical text, mutilating it, changing it (which can’t be denied today), then it is important to not only know where the changes lie but what the motives are being those changes.
I also use the NKJV because of efforts in my 20’s to memorize Scripture. I actually switched to a hybrid version awhile back (it was the Orthodox Study Bible NKJV NT and altered NKJV OT to match LXX, but when I realized persecution could be coming I switched back, wanting to keep consistency with what I had done before. I also switched because the OSB was not available on Logos for some strange reason.
Also, I’ve used the NKJV for about 25 years now and it is familiar.
27. pg 38 How can I be certain that the stolen election will end in a single party rule in the US.
This was previously addressed, but let me stated that logic dictates this. There is a concerted effort and I think a conspiracy among radicalized liberals to destroy the American culture and replace it with a communist or socialist one. Trumps election in 2016 infuriated the left so much that they swore to never allow such a thing to happen again. I think their use of big tech, of corrupt governments, an impotent judiciary, a compromised media, and an indoctrinated millennial generation brought about the “means to an end” in election fraud. Now that they have done this successfully (as other countries have proven in the past) they will continue to do so again and again. While the liberals are in office they will swing the pendulum as far as they can to the left to remove even the possibility of conservatives to swing back. This, I think, is being done by the dilution of liberals and immigrants into the population of predominately red states. Once they can swing these states blue, they will be able to rule by fiat and with a stacked supreme course (coming soon), there will be no recourse for the conservative or the biblical Christian in America any longer. This will eventually/potentially lead to the break up of the country or a civil war in which the conservatives will be put down by the federal government, as we can see the purging of the conservative from the military already underway.
I do think there will be a counter movement but it will be too late and too weak to accomplish anything.
28. pg 39 I state the mind virus has infected the masses. He wants to know if it is not actually a loud minority that has been infected?
More specifically, the minority have created such a culture of hyper-sensitivity that many go along whether they agree or not simply to avoid being canceled. But, I do think there is a new generation of Americans who have been socially engineered toward socialism. Once this generation takes power, then it will be the majority that are infected with this mind virus. This, of course, is predicted by Paul in the Bible, in that they will received a strong delusion to lead them away from the truth.
29. pg 39 I make a comment that american churches need to abandon professional clergy and laity/clergy distinction. He questions if there should be a distinction between pastors and non-pastors, between paid pastors and non-paid pastors?
I do not think there is a term “pastor” in the Bible. The Greek word for elder or shepherd is translated pastor once in Ephesians 4:11 and this should never have happened. It was a achronistic move to support the professional clergy class that rose after the reformation. When plurality become difficult to sustain, they went with the Moses shepherding model of one lead pastor. This was also exacerbated by an increasing biblical illiteracy among congregations who sought to raise up for themselves teachers who would itch their ears and do the work for them. Church has since became a passive activity for the congregation and an occupation rather than a calling for the “pastor.”
There should be no paid clergy. The local church should be shepherded by a plurality of elders. There are different gifts but they should not be treated as titles or occupations, but as functions within a body. The entire evangelical church program is a distraction. The purpose of the local body is to raise up and edify the body to works of service. This has been all but abandoned. Now it is just a weekly program geared around entertainment and the perpetuation of the clergy profession.
31. pg 45 I ask the question do humans create theistic beliefs or do theistic beliefs already exist and humans just recgonize them? He states Romans 1 they know and suppress.
In this sense we would be in agreement if humans simply recognize theistic realities. Those realities already exist. They are not the creation of the human mind or intellect or emotion. God exists. Angels exist. The Supernatural Realm exists distinctly and independently of human faculty. This of course has not yet been proven. Fundamentally, we don’t know with any certainty if theistic reality is independent of human faculty. If it is, then there is certainly more to the story. If not, and it is all myth imagined by man, the we are, as Paul says, the most pitiable. But you would be correct in stating that Romans 1 covers this. What is knowable of God has been made known, his invisible attributes clearly seen and understood by his creation. We are utterly without excuse.
32. pg 48. I comment about “the bible and the revealing of the gospel.” He wants to know if these are not the same thing?
No, not necessarily. There are portions of the Bible that are not directly about the gospel. It is all indirectly applicable to the gospel message, as Christ is on every page. But, there will be people saved who are not part of the Church (OT saints, Post Rapture saints). Paul tells us the gospel was hidden since the foundation of the world and only revealed through the apostles. It is a mystery. It is a means of exception by which God can redeem the gentile through the grafting of the wild branch to the tree. The gospel becomes the central point of Scripture on in this dispensation. It is quite possible that the gospel (in our iteration) will cease to be important (once we are Sons of God and like the angels) and a new iteration becomes central to the work of God (a new group of beings to be redeemed). This is, of course, highly speculative.
33. [stated it was a very good goal to further develop the dissertation into a comprehensive online curriculum and make it freely available]
Yes, but, lately I’ve been concerned about effectiveness. How effective would this effort be for the body of Christ? Where can I put my time, my resources, and my effort to best effect? Creating yet another book or course or program is pointless if it is not effective in preparing people and in building up the body of believers. The state of publishing today seems to indicate it would be better served as blog posts or podcast episodes. Then again, I have the time. I am fully funded by God with a job currently that allows for ample opportunities to develop such resources. There are likewise no resources like it available, and it may not be created for individuals or groups today. It might be used by God in 200, 300, 1000 years from now during the actually end of days when the antichrist is revealed and wages war against the saints. It is also possible that it will never be used by anyone other than myself, to prepare for what could occur in my lifetime. I will have to consider this more once I’m finished with the ThD wrapup.
35. pg 46 Which apocyraphal idea do both Peter and Jude ascribe to?
All we can say with certainty about this is that both assume there were angels who sinned and God imprisoned them. They will be judged at the final judgment (and assumed to be thrown into the Lake of Fire). Peter mentions they are imprisoned in Tartarus but provides no elaboration. It is assumption that they are referring here to the Book of Enoch, which was well known during their time. This connects them with Genesis 6:2 and the Enoch interpretation. This likewise connects to Paul’s statements about the supernatural realm and the angels (and sexual allusions).
36. pg 47 There are here issue with the different rebellions. He argues that the celestial rebellion occured first since satan was in the garden and had already fallen before the Gen 6 rebellion. Elaborate.
This is actually inconclusive. We cannot be sure if Satan in the garden with Eve occurred before or after he lost his war in Re 12. Likewise, there is no way to determine (beyond speculation) if there was one angelic rebellion or if there were two or a multitude. We certainly know there was one when Satan fell (Isaiah 14:12-14; Ezekiel 28:12-18). But not if this was the same event in Rev 12 or this was additional. But, this has no bearing on the Genesis 6:2 rebellion, except that we are uncertain as to which rebellion Peter and Jude refer. If to the original fall or to the Re 12 fall, then this casts doubt on the Enoch interpretation of Genesis 6:2 since it is given authority by Peter and Jude. But if they are referring to the Enoch interpretation, then the 2 or 3 rebellion events stand on their own merit.
The core problem here is that we are not given a clear or complete narrative of the events. We do not have the chronology or all the events that transpired. The account is shrouded from our view. So to state emphatically that there was a rebellion that led to the garden is assumptive. The garden event could have sparked the rebellion. Just because Satan was in the garden does not automatically necessitate a fall. Supernatural beings clearly have the means and ability to enter our physical dimensionality and interact with human beings. The angelic fall or rebellion is not prerequisite.
37. pg 48 Where do the church fathers and new testament writers cite the angelic view, mention it, etc?
Justin Martyr – Second Apology; Chapter V.
Irenaeus – A discourse in the Demonstration of Apostolic Preaching
Ambrose – Ambrose, on Noah, 4.8. Genesis 1–11, Volume 1
Clement – Clementine Homilies, Homily VIII, Chapter XIII
The references in the Bible to this from the NT authors would be the typical suspects: 2 Peter, Jude, but also Paul in his cryptic and unexplained reference to “because of the angels” concerning women having a symbol of authority on their heads.
38. pg 49 Where is there proof that the reformers found the angelic view repugnant?
Here is Calvin’s words from his commentary, “That ancient figment, concerning the intercourse of angels with women, is abundantly refuted by its own absurdity; and it is surprising that learned men should formerly have been fascinated by ravings so gross and prodigious.”
The repugnant comment in the dissertation actually was referencing Chaffey’s book Fallen where he states, “John Calvin was disgusted by the idea of angelic beings marrying women, so he simply ridiculed the view instead of offering a critique based upon careful study of Scripture. The same has been true for many others since his time.”
Calvin and Luther both as well as many other reformers saw the angelic view as “disgusting.”
39. pg 51 Does the statement about deut 32 and psalm 82 state the nations are under the rule of angels?
In Deut 32:8 we have in the Masoretic the statement “children of Israel.” But, I think this was an alteration made to the text. In the LXX and DSS it state “angels of God.”
Likewise, we see in verse 8 he divided the inheritance of the nations among the “angels of God.” This constituted the “sons of Adam” and set their boundaries.
Pslalm 82 provides a glimpse at God judging among the gods, yet, despite being supernatural and non-mortal, these other gods will die like men.
The writer goes on to illustrate how God criticizes the angels for how they are judging the inhabitants of the earth unjustly and depicts accurately how horrendous existence is on the earth because of their poor management.
In the end, in verse 8, we see the only solution is for God himself to judge the nations, which he will do during the Millennium.
40. pg 52 He’s asking for examples of modern pastors wanting to explain away the supernatural altogether.
There is a fitting example I used in the dissertation from Dr. Heiser. He states a pastor once got up to preach and said, “We’re going to skip this section altogether because it doesn’t make any sense,” referring to a section of Scripture dealing with the supernatural realm.
This can also be seen in modern strategies when preaching. Pastors will simply skip over sections of the Bible without even mentioning it, simply because that portion is too controversial or deals with angels or heaven.
But here is a statement from one pastor who almost gave up on a belief in the supernatural realm and what the state of evangelicalism is today: “Careful reading of the Bible and the sheer weight of empirical evidence eventually forced me back to a supernatural Christianity. But in this I found myself out of sync with much of western theology. Here at least liberals were consistent, but not evangelicals. The liberals denied the supernatural both in the Bible and the present; evangelicals fought tooth and nail to defend the miraculous in the Bible but rarely could cope with it in real life! Increasingly it is now recognized that much of the western mind has been domesticated by modernity, with its roots in Enlightenment thought. The autonomous rationalism initiated by Descartes and a narrow empiricism pioneered by Hume have so emasculated the modern worldview that what is left is merely a mechanistic universe. The resultant denial of the supernatural crippled much of theology, leading to at least two serious consequences. First, most present-day western systematic and pastoral theologies fail to address the realm of the demonic, at both the personal and cosmic levels. Many scholars simply deny or ignore the whole subject, explaining away numerous related biblical passages.”
41. pg 52 He wants examples/references of Galatians and how Paul saw the battle and war as a cosmic conflict rather than on the earthly plane.
This content came primarily from a dissertation on this very subject titled, “Persecution and Cosmic Conflict in Galatians.” it uses persecution to identify the war being waged on the supernatural dimension, between God, and what Paul calls in Ephesians, “the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.” Humans are caught in the crossfire of this cosmic war and this is illustrated by persecution against the saints.
43. pg 54. He cautions to be careful with job as the speeches are both right and wrong, depending on who is speaking. Look into this particular reference and see what the context is.
This is an interesting observation. One I honestly missed. In the disertation I was directly quoting Dr. Heiser in his book Angels, where he references Job 15:15. This states that God puts no trust in “his holy ones” (LXX) or “saints” (MT), where Heiser here asserts that this is referencing the issue with the angels ruling over the nations. But, my advisor is correct, this is spoken of by Eliphaz, the first of Jobs friends to speak. Job does respond to him and does criticize his overall comments, but never directly rebutts the issue of the Deut 32 worldview.
This, of course, could mean several different things. 1. They all would agree with the Deut 32 worldview and this was not what Job was arguing against. 2. Job disagreed with Eliphaz’ Deut 32 worldview. 3. Eliphaz was not referring to a Deut 32 worldview.
Though this was the dominate view (Chaffey would say exclusively) during the intertestamental and new testament periods, it does not automatically indicate it was the view in Job’s setting. There is an argument to be made, though, for just that. It is possible the 2 Temple Period writers received their worldview from Job’s time period and before. It could be an ancient understanding. As Genesis 6:2 states, “they were men of old, men of reknown.”
Whether or not Eliphaz was incorrect would require more research. But, in my dissertation, I stand on the quote from Dr. Heiser who stands on his quote and commentary of Job.
45. pg 56 At mention of martial arts as infecting the church, he wants to know if all forms of fighting are sinful?
This would have to be delineated between all forms of human fighting or fighting in general. We know that the angels and other beings in the supernatural realm are, indeed, warring beings. It is a warring culture of some kind of violence. The language used to describe them, the narrative imagery used in their depictions are clearly militant. Paul uses the metaphor of the soldier and the military man repeatedly. Now, how much of this is borrowing from the traditions of the NT period or how much of it is descriptive directly of the overall nature of the supernatural realms is difficult to say.
But, if restricting the argument to human fighting alone, and then additionally restricting it to the subset of martial arts that originate and/or influenced by far eastern philosophy, then it stands to reason that all martial arts (that do qualify under these conditions) are to be avoided. They could easily be classified under “doctrines of demons” and also in the apocalyptic literature we find the angels coming to earth and delivering all manner of forbidden knowledge to human beings, with one of those being means of fighting and knowledge in forging weaponry.
A broader issue to address here is the reality of violence in and of itself. Should Christians engage in war, in fighting, in self defense? Jesus states in Matt 9:35 and Lu 6:29 that we should turn the other cheek, not resist the evil person, and to the one who steals your first cloak given them your other. At least from a straightforward reading, this appears to be quite pacifistic . Jesus tells us, “Do not fear him who kills the body but cannot kill the soul” (Ma 10:28), so it does not matter, as Paul quotes the Psalms, “the Lord is my helper, I will not fear. What can man do to me?” (He 13:6).
The purpose of this reference in the dissertation to martial arts infecting the church has more to do with the modern tendency of especially mainline denominations to often court and sometimes invite in with open arms heretical teaching from new age groups and secular philosophies. How many churches can be seen today renting out their facilities to Yoga teachers or Tai Chi instructors, often times those very teachers of these far eastern mystical arts being so called members of those very churches! It is a tendency to pander for acceptance and perceived relevance that drives such compromise sometimes to the point that the overall message is nothing but lukewarm.
46. pg 62 Examples wanted for the tangle of roots for the intersectionality people.
This is a direct quote from an article written by Matt Stewart entitled, “Identity Politics and the New Cuture War.” It does not elaborate on the statement beyond what is quoted, but let me try to expand on the idea itself.
There is a current cultural malaise that is driving the discontent or (their word) derangement. 1. Current cultural failures. 2. Environmental Distress. 3. Perceived inequality based on race.
The current western culture of capitalism and education and meritocracy has failed the last two generations. No longer is education the key to the middle class as was promised, nor do the economics of follow your passion produce the advertised results. But, there are remaining “roots” that at least appear to be manufactured by outside forces to drive and manipulate the new generations who have by and large been indoctrinated into socialist ideals by a corrupted education system. Issues pertaining to the climate and capitalism’s perceived (or perscribed) guilt in causing it for the sake of profit and perceived (or perscribed) guilt of certain segments of society for passed racial crimes that no one alive today committed and no one alive today endured. These are all aimed by outside forces to divide the populous into fractions so that they can push their caste system and strip the US of her longstanding individual rights and freedoms.
There is a pressing feeling among the young that the old have traded their offspring’s future for profits in the short-term. And there is some truth to this feeling. But a large percentage of these “roots” are manufactured crises designed to exact totalitarianism. The new generations are being duped. The baby-boomers are being scapegoated (to a certain degree), and the wealthy elites are finally getting their one world government they’ve always desired. The devil is the only winner in the end (from an earthly standpoint).
47. pg 66 He wants to know if I think big eva is going socialist as I describe it as being capitalist.
On the one hand, Capitalism is opposed to the socialist ideal. The problem here is this for-profit model is only a shallow layer placed on top of the American Church, a means by which the professional clergy can amass wealth for itself and a means by which the congregants can heap up for themselves teachers that will itch their ears, but otherwise allow them to passively remain on the sidelines. To preserve this self-interest machine, the Church will do whatever it needs to do. It will change its doctrine. It will compromise. It will pander.
The American church will not go socialist but is parasitic. As it slowly gives up on its biblical positions it will eventually find it looks and acts no differently than its socialist host.
48. pg 67 He wants to know how a self-centered ideology and a universe is the source of all being can fit together.
This statement describes the Romans 1 motif created by Paul of the human who suppresses what can be known of God. “…although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.” The atheistic, materialist culture now ascribes to God’s creation a non-personal “universal” whether it be scientism, newage, as long as it is not the God of the Bible. The “universe as the source of all being” is the ideology of the culture today. This is an inherently selfish culture, one that is focused entirely upon the self, and is propagated in a futile attempt to alleviate the impending judgment of an all knowing, all seeing personal Creator. This new worldview gives credit of the creation to the aberration rather than to the actual maker of heaven and earth.
49. pg 68 I state it is probably too late to turn back the tide. He states self-awareness started in 2019 and a counter movement is growing. Is this true? Will it make a difference?
I would agree there is growing backlash to the push by the elites to grab for power and to strip the country of her rights. But, I think this culture war started back in the 20’s and possibly even before, it has supernatural implications and influences that go beyond just socialism at the human level. Paul said these were “principalities, powers, rulers of the darkness of this age, spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places” (Eph 6:12).
Personally I think the pushback from conservatives will only exacerbate the crisis. It is, if you will, the last gasp of a way of life that is about dead. The COVID vaccine mandates have only driven religious people out of the shadows and have taken a clear mark on their chest identifying who they are. Their names are now on lists being compiled by the elites and they will soon be rounded up and expunged from the equation. At the threat (or sight of) assets being seized and Christians being imprisoned (for the sake of public health), many will cave and will ultimately comply with the new regime’s wishes.
At best, you will have fly over states begin to secede from the union, which will spark a civil war and the UN will bring in foreign troops to deal with the rebellious states. This will be the end of the US, of the American ideal, and will fulfill biblical prophecy in the absence of America in the prophetic record altogether.
I think it is simply too late.
50. pg 69 I stated 80% of African Americans today identify as Christian. He stated he had no idea. That it was hard to accept given the family culture that is presented as normative.
Granted, this statistic might be relatively accurate, there was a time in Church History where the majority of Europe would have said likewise, even though it is clear they were not. When Christianity became the state religion and, in fact, all other forms of religion were outlawed, a mass inclusion of non-Christians entered the ranks of the “church.”
It is similar today in a post-modern, pluralistic culture. To claim to be a “christian” does not mean the same thing to everyone. It often means nothing. It can reference family affiliation to a particular historical church or denomination. It could mean membership in some offshoot cult. It could mean charismania which is nothing more than a Roman spirit cult. Today it is best exampled in the term used to signal certain realities in the dating world. To say I am “spiritual not religious” typically indicates 1. I have little to no commitment to biblical Christianity 2. I am promiscuous or at least open to sex outside of marriage 3. I might very well be mixing new age or cultic practices with a watered-down Christianity.
To state any particular ethnic group is 80% Christian is a misnomer. It essentially means nothing since the definition of Christian is today so broad and includes so many diverse beliefs and groups that it is hardly descriptive. Lesbian feminist Churches have members who would claim to be Christian. Mormons likewise claim to be Christian. The website I stumbled onto last night of the Mystical Rose is a monastic community that claims to be Christian, yet they are deeply entrenched in Buddhist and new age teaching.
The culture and lifestyle referenced here is the true litmus test. “You will know them by their fruits,” (Matt 7:16).
51. pg 69 I state intersectionality is not widely known outside of academia. He states it is mainstream now. I would argue against this. Elaborate on how the masses still don’t get it.
Cancel culture is widespread. Intersectionalty and Critical Race Theory are still misunderstood or unheard of by the masses. There is so much deception being delved out by the media and influencers that most people have no idea what is really happening or why. Much like Cyrus overtaking Babylon without the spilling of blood, many people in America will be utterly surprised when they wake up one morning and find their country and their rights and their freedoms are simply gone.
52. pg 72 What is the difference between diversity and radical socialism?
Radical socialism is the human mechanism by which totalitarianism is enacted. Diversity is the guise that is used as camouflage to entice the masses into the fold.
53. pg 72 After the radicals tear down the country and the culture, what will they build afterward?
To be honest, I would almost say they don’t themselves know. I think they are deluded by a strong delusion from God. They are falling prey to the devil’s enticements. Does Bill Gates know he’s fulfilling biblical prophecy and setting the stage and the mechanisms to usher in the antichrist? Would he care if he did know? Is his worldview materialist and he is an unsuspecting rube trying his best? Or is he a Lucifarian, working for Satan to bring about the NWO?
How much these people know is unclear. What is clear from a biblical Christian’s perspective is, the devil is behind all of these events. He is pulling the strings of all the earthly governments. But, God is ultimately in control, even though Satan might think he has the upper hand. He too (the devil) is deluding himself.
In the end, whether they intend to or not, the radical will pave the way to create a global system that is led by the antichrist. They will not be able to help themselves. They may think they are doing something entirely different and may be shocked afterward, once the delusion is over, that they played the part they did. Then again, those who bow to the new system have no chance of salvation anyway, so they may never wake from their fantasies.
54. pg 75 When I state no African American today has been a slave, he comments “sex slave?” respond.
I would not accept sex slave as a form of slavery under the terms of the context being talked about. Social justice is not about sex slavery. It is peddling the narrative that whites are ethnically (as a group) guilty of slavery against blacks (as a group), despite no white living today has ever owned a slave and no black today has ever been a slave.
55. pg 76 He state that the church can never be worldly enough for the world, after I comment that the woke mob is skeptical of the woke church. Discuss.
It is true since the woke church is a means or attempt at solving the perceived problem of inequality. But, there will never be a solution under the framework of work ideology since it’s primary purpose is to destroy the institutions within the western culture. It is not to solve problems.
58. pg 90 I state the American church has never been a healthy expression of Christianity. He asks if Puritanism was the most healthy version? Doesn’t every ethnicity have to form unique worship gatherings?
Puritanism would be included in the American church and would likewise be just as unhealthy as the modern American church. Every distinct group of people have the right to form worship gatherings, but the unifying commonality (at least it should be) is all these gatherings should be modeled after the New Testament. Unfortuantely, culture, sin, personal self-interest, politics all have a hand in molding the individual church expression. There is an argument to be made from Church History that no expression of the local church has ever been healthy. I’ve personally seen glimpses of the body of Christ moving in healthy ways, but it never lasts for long. I’ve experienced informal communities that spring up without plan or forethought. I’ve seen formal communities buckle under heresy. American Christianity is deeply preoccupied with capitalism and the product of Christianity. But even the best examples of the biblical church have blindspots and problems. Whether it be an organized, modern church, a monastery, an intentional community, a commune, or a Bible study or house church, it is difficult to impossible for the human being to function as the Bible prescribes it.
59. pg 92 Is CTR and intersectionalty divine judgment brought onto the world (and America) due to their slide away from God?
It is divine providence that CTR and intersectionality are being used by the radicals and the liberal church to bring about the NWO (if, indeed, this does actually occur at this time). It is, in human history, a continual slide toward liberalism and compromise. It is quite possible America is being judged. But this could be asked of any country on earth? Was Babylon being judged when it was overtaken by Cyrus? What about the Soviet Union when it fell? Are all geo-political events under the influence and part of God’s plan, or do countries and peoples rise and fall by economics and other variables alone? It could be argued that America’s possible soon demise is directly related to it’s slide into a pluralistic, non-Christian worldview. But, the founding fathers established a secular government, despite the revisionism by some Christian thinkers.
There is really no way to answer this question since we are not privy to God’s thinking. Likewise, we have no directly revealed prophecy any longer to warn us.
60. pg 93. There is some truth to the relativistic nature of reality and our perceptions. He wants to know what that truth is.
Quantum mechanics. The idea that our physical reality is not actually solid as we think of it but digital. It is a simulation. Our reality is relative to the observer. How this is possible is unknown. Why it is is also unknown. Scripture supports it in Col 1:17. Interestingly, this is repeated in Sirach 43:26. The same word is used here that Paul uses, σύνκειται συνέστηκ, meaning “to set together, combine.”
It is Christ that holds our reality together, from moment to moment. But, there is something more to the substance of reality, since it will burn up, the elements melting with fervent heat (2 Pe 3:10-12). If it were simply a simulation, then why the heat? There must be something more. But, this reality does appear to be relative to the observer, at least to some extent. How much of our reality, this plane of physical dimensionality we create by our observation of it is unclear. What occurs with that reality when there is no observer observing it is likewise unclear, though the slit experiment would indicate that the physical dimension collapses in on itself into a state of probability and potentiality.
It is pretty evident from the biblical acount, utilizing the Enochian worldview, that the supernatural realms are the primary dimensionality (what is beyond or above this is utterly unknown and possibly incomprehensible to the human mind) and our physical dimension is a subsumption of that greater reality known by God and the angels.
61. pg 94. I state it is not the Christian’s responsibility to reason with the person who has denied god. He states there is a limited responsibility and references 2 Co 10:4-5.
I’m not certain of the relevance of the above stated passage. I would be more oft to utilize 1 Co 10:24, 33; 9:19–23; Phil 2:4-5 in an argument for our Christian responsibility to reason with the God denier. It is difficult, without a gift of evangelism or that of the evangelist, with an introverted disposition (whether natural, corruptible, or by divine design), and with a quite prominent tendency toward misanthropy, to follow Paul’s guide here. I have a difficult enough time serving the Church, let alone common man.
62. pg 95 Does christianity build up societies and all else tears down societies?
I would argue that all things human tear down and only God builds up. There is nothing in the human context that is innately good. There is a darkness and shadow to everything man does. As God concluded before the flood, “every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually” (Gen 6:5).
63. pg 95 I stated that once christianity was at odds with the world around them. He states they still are. I disagree.
I would disagree that the modern evangelical church is at odds with the world around them. They have compromised the biblical message and are nothing more today than fraternal and maternal organizations. Modern evangelicalism and the expression of the modern local church is not biblical in function, structure, or appearance.
64. pg 96 Do I mandate a rushing in toward persecution? Is this the right action for all christians?
This is a very difficult question. There were those in the early church who did just that, sought out persecution. Saturus voluntarily proclaimed himself a Christian before the magistrate and was subsequently killed alongside Perpetua in the third century. Others simply lived their lives until they were approached. Still others fled, hid, or otherwise tried to hide their faith from authorities. All of these options are seen used in modern contexts today in North Korea and China.
I think it is a decision each individual Christian must make for themselves. And, keep in mind, all of these are different from the individual who denounces Christ or their profession when asked to choose. Also being caught up in revolutions and revolts, committing acts of terrorism, etc are likewise not the same and are prohibited by 1 Peter 4:15.
65. pg. 96. I stated that single party rule and wave of radicalism (socialist) is inevitable in the US. He disagrees. Support my claim.
First and foremost, America must at some point go away. She is not mentioned anywhere in biblical prophecy. Second, at some point, there will need to be established a one world global government that will restrict the freedoms of the entire world populous. Third, there must be a falling away from the faith, which we are already seeing and will see increase exponentially when biblical (and popular) Christianity is outlawed. Fourth, the swiftness and boldness of those in control of this regime will overpower any opposition force. In addition, they will be aided by the UN and China. Lastly, the opposition is too mired in cultural compromise: capitalism, nationalism, conservativism rather than in biblical Christianity.
66. pg 97 The American christian church will be a major source of persecution against biblical christians in the future. Elaborate and provide evidence.
There are several passages in the Bible that I think at least indicate this. John 16:2 says those who kill you [in the end times] will think they are offering service to God. This either means there will be a distinction between biblical believers and the religious of the one world religion (that thinks it worships the God of the Bible) or the “god” referenced here is a different god than the God of the Bible.
2 Ti 4:3-4 states in the end times people (and specifically the religious) will not stand for sound doctrine but will heap up for themselves teachers who will satisfy their “itching ears,” telling the masses what they want to hear rather than what the truth actually is.
2 Th 2:3 warns that the “falling away” must come before the end. This means either toward a different religion altogether (as we are seeing starting to form now) or a counterfeit Christianity that will take over mainstream churches (which we are also seeing today).
Lastly, looking at Church History it is easy to take away the tendency of the church universal to persecute her own. Combine this track record with the above references and the current events of our day and it is an easy extrapolation toward the idea that modern Christianity will comprise the major thrust of future persecution against biblical believers.
67. pg 97 Summarize the history of persecution in the Church. How diverse has it’s manifestations been over the centuries.
There are primarily 5 major divisions to the history of persecution in Christianity. There is period 1: early church persecution. This runs from apostolic times in the first century to the fourth century when Christianity was made the state religion of the Roman Empire. This marks period 2: persecution of the church by the church. This came in many different forms, primarily the Catholic Church working to silence what it perceived as heretical ideas. This runs until the Reformation. Period 3: is persecution among denominations. Predominately Catholic vs Protestant, but also Protestant against Protestant and Protestant against other external forms (Mormons, JWs, etc). This lasts until the modern era or the later 1800’s. Period 4: This is the period of modern persecution by outside forces (i.e. Islam, Socialism) and occurs in non-western regions (i.e. China, North Korea, Russia). This also marks the apostasy of Europe and the rise of atheism. Lastly is Period 5: This is the yet-to-be period of persecution to come upon the earth and is beginning to develop. It will mark the most probable breakup of the United States as a country, will spark a last great persecution against biblical Christianity and will usher in the End of Days and the New World Order and the antichrist.
By and large, persecution against the church comes and goes and exists in varying degrees of severity. It can be likened to waves at sea with periods of calm and other periods of raging storms.
68. pg 97 Why do you say persection is inevitable but then argue that it is impossible to determine when or if persecution will come?
We have all be wrong collectively and individually about end times events. Church History is replete with errors from date setters and prognosticators who were certain that Y2K would spell the end of western civilization, or the Bay of Pigs would spark WWIII or the Mark of the Beast was an RFI Chip implanted under the skin. There is an argument to be made that Paul was incorrect as well about the end times.
The reality is, we can look at the Bible and at its prophecies, at the interpretations that have come down to us from past theologians, and can look at the current events as they unfold, and make an educated guess as to what might happen and what the probability could be.
Persecution is inevitable because the Bible predicts it. But I have no way of knowing if it wil come in my lifetime, in 20-30-50 years, or in another 1000 years. But, if God is true (Ro 3:4), then it will come. Bible prophecy will be fulfilled completely. When is not for us to know (Matt 25:13). It is quite possible that all of these clamoring will settle down with the next election or the next natural tragedy. I don’t think it will. I think the end is near. I hope the end is near. I pray that Christ will come today, immediately, and delay no longer. But, again, we might look back from eternity and view our period of time as still the early church era. No one knows but the father when all will be said and done and when he will send Jesus to collect the saints.
69. pg 98 Why do the examples of the Khmer Rouge and atrocities of the Sudanese government serve as examples of what is wrong with humanity, of our fallen nature?
These two instances (along with many others) illustrate how power in the hands of fallen humanity is essentially evil and will produce only evil. The system we’ve been in, the system that will develop from this one (the NWO) proves only that humans are doomed in their sin if not for the singular hope in Christ’s willing sacrifice. Power corrupts. The span of human history illustrates how those in power are growing increasingly more corrupt as time goes on (there is an argument that things are getting better in some respects, but those aspects are attributed to man’s efforts and not to God’s provision because of the materialist agenda to refuse God any credit).
70. pg 99 How does a certain branch of christianity in the US serve to forward the radical left’s agenda?
This is the liberal or progressive branch of Christianity. It is the branch that denies inerrancy, it denies the supremacy of God, and believes it must reach the lost culture on its own terms rather than by standing on the Word of God and the truth therin. It is the branch that apologizes for racial sins it had nothing to do with and for perceived inequalities that are self-inflicted and self-perpetuating.
71. pg 99 I state dominionism is negative and a perversion of the Christian faith. His response was: should abortion or theft not be aggressively fought against?
These examples are not the same as the dominion view that believes it will bring about the Kingdom of God on earth by human effort. Yes, all sin should be resisted. But at what point do we draw a line? If we can utilize laws and courts to fight against abortion then why not a gun or a sword to fight against tyranny? Why not implement theocracy by force, arming Christian militias to usher in the Kingdom on earth? The honest answer is because the Dominionist has too high of an opinion of himself and of the modern church. Likewise does the postmillennialist.
72. pg 99 If violence does not solve the problem of violence, how should violence be put down? Should it be put down?
I do not have an answer to this question. I’m not certain what should be done. Personally, my flesh instinctively wants to fight. I want to become the revolutionary, to rise up and overthrow the government or die trying (death being optimal). But, I know Scripture forbids this. No vengeance. No repaying evil with evil. But, to address the question above, how to stop violence, I do not know. I’m not certain where I stand on the two world wars or on the revolution or even the civil war. At this point, I’m not certain I know how to answer for self-defense. Defending family and friend and other is a different story. This is sacrificial, a selfless act. But trying to save one’s own life? Trying to put down a government that is persecuting you because of your faith (not because you’re a revolutionary or a terrorist) is not what God called us to do. He called us to suffer, to pray, to endure and to die for his name sake.
73. pg 100 Who is to blame for this takeover and ultimate fall of the US culture and government and freedoms? Patriotism? Socialist philosophies? God? Sin (as in judgment for)?
Ultimately, this must be within God’s plan and design for the US. Everything is in his hand and nothing occurs without his willing it to occur. The US has long been due for judgment if the nations in the Bible can attest. By the very words of the founding fathers, this experiment has been secular, or designed in such a way to secure religious freedom for all faiths, not just Christianity. They argued against theocracy specifically because humans in their fallen nature cannot be trusted to do anything but evil continually. In the end, it is not the fault of anyone and it is the fault of everyone. Christianity in America is guilty of many things. The radical movement are also held accountable in the end for their actions and part they played. In the end, whatever happens, it will be God’s will.
74. pg 100 Based on the example of increased guns and ammo sales in the US, is there a pushback waiting in the wings against CTR, Intersectionality, and the socialist agenda? Is it possible that americans will be able to look beyond the bottom line of capitalism and throw out the elites in power pulling the strings and usher in a restored representative democracy? Will the elites even allow this?
If there is pushback it will be too late, too weak, and too divided. The centralization of power in the hands of a few oligarchs will not allow for a swing back toward freedom. Likewise, it is important that we do not find ourselves on the side of God’s opposition, as Gamaliel stated, “if this plan or this work is of men, it will come to nothing; but if it is of God, you cannot overthrow it—lest you even be found to fight against God” (Acts 5:38-39).
75. pg 105 What does it mean to say accomodation is the best option in the chinese christian context?
There were Christians who openly exposed themselves and were killed. Then others who accommodated the best they could so they could remain and continue to spread the gospel in secret. Then there were those who compromised and ceased to labor for the faith. I personally think accommodation is the best option in most circumstances as it allows the individual to remain in that context they find themselves in and they can potentially provide a lasting witness. Of course, they would need to use Daniel and his friends and Paul and the other apostles as examples. Paul used every legal recourse he had available to him as a Roman citizen. In the end it did not work and he was martyred. But maybe it bought him time enough to write the letters that would one day end up in the Bible that we use today. Daniel and his friends accommodated the Babylonian King up and to the point of violating their conscience before God. The decision then was placed in the King’s hands. It would be up to God ultimately if the three friends burned to death or if Daniel would be killed by the lions. Then again, part of me thinks fleeing while the getting is good is a great idea!
76. pg 106 What is more of a threat to christianity, islam or secular collectivism?
I would say if we are talking about American Christianity then its greatest threat is herself. But on a wider canvas, I think Islam and socialism are one in the same. They are both tools used by Satan to accomplish his purpose of gathering together the nations of the earth to pit them against Israel and the Church and to overthrow God’s redemptive plan.
77. pg 107 China’s christianity grew under pressure yet iran’s christianity shrank under pressure. What was the difference here? So persecution is not always a flame to church growth?
I would disagree. I don’t think this can be looked at from sheer numbers, but from the reality that Christ is building his church not man. The gospel sweeps through a nation like China and the harvest is potentially great with many millions still professing Christ yet in places in the middle east this is not the case. There used to be a great Christian presence there but because of persecution in modern times many have been killed or have left the region.
So those who died remain Christians. Those who fed potentially remain Christians. There is no net loss there in sheer numbers of the universal growth of the Church. There may be no new converts there because that field has become barren. Those individuals who remain there are either hardened to the good news or all the witnesses to the gospel have fled and we know from Paul, “And how shall they hear without a preacher?” (Ro 10:14).
I think postmillennial thinking is inherent in the question here. The Bible does not predict a theonomy on earth, at least not without allegorization and Scripture twisting. Just because the middle east has been hallowed out of Christians does not mean those Christians have been lost to the cause. In fact, whether they fled or died, they were spared even more suffering in the future.
78. pg 109 What are the difference forms of islam, ideal, normal, radical? Is there a difference?
This is a difficult question. I’ve heard there is not. In reality, they all worship a demon. All muslims are destined for the Lake of Fire if they do not accept Christ and they cannot accept Christ if they are not first drawn by the Father to do so. Yet, we see this is happening across the Middle East and among Islam proper. Often God is using dreams and visions to do so due to the lack of understanding and the lack of the Bible, since Muslims do not culturally read the Bible at all. Only a remnant might be saved, but God is working to save all who are his.
79. pg 112 Why is persecution of christians in africa so much worse than other places?
This could be due to judgment or their faith is greater than our own in the west. God deals with people uniquely in different contexts. It’s possible he’s using this because persecution is the best witness to the Islamic mindset. It also might be a testimony against the Islamic world, that they persecute and kill God’s people and they will answer for this at the Day of the Lamb.
80. pg 116 Is some form of religion inevitable in all circumstances? ie. North Korea’s cult of personality religion.
I would say yes. Even our secular culture is propagating an atheistic, materialist religion in scientism.
81. pg 117 What is worse than fatal in the reference to persecution?
Persecution and brutality and long-term suffering is much worse than death, especially for the Christian who puts his hope in Christ and the message of the Bible. If a believer then that person has nothing to fee from the mind of man. They might be able to kill the body but they can do nothing to my soul. And, as Paul put it, to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord.
82. pg 117 What can American christians learn from North Korean christians? examples.
We can learn what it means to put faith above everything else and how to put away petty differences and futile disputes. We can learn what it means to die for our faith as well as move beyond the passive “teaching” and capitalist culture American’s have known for 250 years.
83. pg 118 How do modern churches try to meet needs rather than just provide a venue for passive experience?
I recognize they have programs, like providing services to poor people, firewood services, counseling, marriages and funerals (though I’m not certain this is a good thing) etc. But, by and large, even in smaller congregations is seems passive. I blame this on both the clergy and on the flock. The clergy want to protect their jobs and income while the congregation are content with shirking their responsibilities to the Body of Christ and “just let the pastor do it.” There are gifts in the body particularly set apart by Paul for the expressed purpose of education and raising up the body of Christ…but for the specific aim of that body doing works of service. Each according to his or her gifting. But Christianity should not be a once or twice a week gathering to celebrating sitting in a pew quietly while the pastor does all the work of evangelism, of meeting people in the nursing homes, of reaching out to the lost on youtube, of continual prayer, etc.
84. pg 118 How can we force the spirit into a human made mold?
In reality we are not. We are simulating the move of the spirit for what is actually nothing more than the efforts of men. Then again, because of our fleshly doctrines and limitations and traditions we might just be forcing the holy spirit into constrictors, where we allow him only to operate in certain instances and under certain conditions. One example is to restrict the use of modern translations or the belief that there are no sign gifts for today, or that there is no freewill or that there is no predestination by God. Our limitations could become God’s limitations. If we resist God at every turn except for only on Tuesdays and only if it is in this or that order, how do we know he won’t simply cease to try?
85. pg 119 Is the modern designed church in America evil? Are boards and the like evil? Were the apostles a sort of board? What is fundamnetally wrong with how modern churches in america operate?
To the extent that the modern church design relies on the efforts of men and to the degree that they quench the spirit of God in their insistence on their traditions, then yes, the Church is evil. The boards are not biblical. Hence they are an invention of men and evil. The apostles were not a board. They were unique and not reproducible unless you would argue for the continuation of the apostolic office, in which case you have bigger issues to deal with.
The Bible clearly gives us a pattern and direction on how the local church gathering is to be organized, how it is to function, and to what aims we are to strive and what kinds of attitudes we are to foster when among the brethern. These are all ignored today and instead we have a spectator activity with a few professional clergy and few if any from the congregation actually growing in the Lord or in the knowledge of Jesus Christ.
Fundamentally wrong? It is not a genuinely spirit-led community. It is an earthly organization. I’ve experienced genuine community before. The closest thing I’ve seen to a biblical community is a cenobitic monastery. I had this informally while in the military living in the barracks. Several of us were believers and we would spend our days reading the Bible, communicating with each other, going to the library on base to study, attending the fellowship each week together. I have also seen gatherings that met six days a week for the expressed purpose of praying.
I would say, overall, this is no genuine commitment to real, enduring fellowship or growth in the American church.
87. pg 120 Look into more first hand accounts of the churches in china. Do they really have a healthy vibrant faith? Is there a lot of biblical illiteracy? Disobedience?
Cannot the same accusations be laid squarely at the American church? There is little faith here, a great deal of biblical illiteracy and disobedience, yet we are free to assemble, to study, to learn, to preach and evangelize, to convert, to disciple, to own a bible, as many bibles as we desire, to go to seminary, to own church buildings, and are protected by the constitution for our religious freedoms (for now). Yet, we choose to operate instead in the traditions of men.
88. pg 120 The nt has titles apostle, elder, decon? NT had paid ministers?
It was nothing like what we have today in most modern churches. The title terms in the NT were functional. The only distinguishing titles (still function based) that could be construed as an “office” is elder and this was always in a plurality. Not as a leader or a profession but as a servant to all, teachers and protectors of the church in deed and doctrine. Paul is a perfect example of one who was not paid.
89. pg 121 Did first century christians meet in public buildings (not houses) and synagogues or did they meet in secret in homes (from house to house)?
They did all these things. They met in the synagogues and the temple because that was the system in their day that already existed, and Christianity was born from the Jewish faith. They also met daily from house to house to encourage one another. These people lived together, worked together and shared everything in common. As congregations grew they would meet in larger homes of wealthy believers out of practicality because they had space. But I can’t imagine it was anything like today’s asset driven religion.
Churches have attempted to make up for their difficiency by starting small groups, which is a good thing. I think more important, though, is the American church needs to really examine why the local meeting was removed from the home context and became a spectator driven activity rather than a participatory one.
90. pg 123 Did the apostles eventual dispair of life itself? Or were they overjoyed to be persecuted for christ?
They were both. Paul states, “I have learned in whatever state I am, to be content: I know how to be abased, and I know how to abound. Everywhere and in all things I have learned both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need. I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me” (Phil 4:11-13).
This I have experienced, to be pressed beyond what you think you can endure, yet to simultaneously be overjoyed in the mercy and grace God given you. The word here for “dispair,” according to the UBS Handbooks seems to indicate that they did not necessarily not want to live anymore (as despair would indicate) but that were certain they would die.
91. pg 124 How does God use suffering in an individual’s or a groups’ (even a countries’) life as an example for others?
An individual might suffer from cancer or some other illness, even to the point of death. But, the reason and purpose for the sickness altogether was not about the individual at all. In fact, it may not be for the individual. We see this exampled in Job, since the entirety of the story was about Satan and God not about Job. The same could be said of groups or countries. Look at China as an example to the American Church. It provides us with examples and simultaneously convicts and condemns us. I’m convinced we will be compared to China at the Judgment, and we will be held accountable for all our freedoms we’ve squandered.
93. pg 129 Did christianity spread because paganism was already dying, or did christianity push out paganism that would have continued on if christianity had not arrived to begin with?
It appears as if by the late 300s the Christian state supported church had so much influence Ambrose was able to convince the ruler to remove the pagan altar and the financial support to the cults. So, from a cursory examination, I would argue the absence of Christianity being legitimized, Paganism would have continued on in Rome.
94. pg 136 Is legal slavery different than government tyranny in that some forms of slavery are condemned in the bible but no form of tyranny is condoned in the bible?
Slavery is subjective. As you pointed out, there is sex slavery even today in America. There is an argument to be made that modern employment is a form of slavery or at least a kind of indentured servitude. Slavery was also different in biblical times than what was experienced in America. In fact, what occurred in America was outlawed in the Bible (Ex 21:16).
As to tyranny, God specifically states, “Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord”” (Ro 12:19). As well, Ro 13:1-14; Matt 5:38-39, and in 1 Pe 2:13-17 Peter makes it very clear: 1. we are to follow all the institutions of the land, not because they are right or because they are godly, but because we are to be convicted of nothing save Christ. 2. We are free but we don’t use that freedom to do evil. We are slaves of God. 3. Therefore we should honor all people, love the church, fear God, and honor the king (or whatever government you have – even if it is tyrannical).
So, at what point then must we obey God rather than men? When the government of Rome told the apostles not to preach in Jesus’ name, they could not comply. We are told to always have an answer for the faith we have in Christ. Paul, likewise, used every legal remedy available to him as a Roman citizen to preserve his ministry and life. This afforded him at least a year where he was able to write several letters that later became part of the New Testament.
There is a shift today in our culture and it is a global shift away from nation states toward a one world government. This, in and of itself, is not objected to in the Bible. But, it is prophesied that this one world government will be ruled by the antichrist and he will fight against the saints and will kill anyone who does not comply with the new system (which is a religion). Just as Daniel’s three companions could not bow down to the King’s statue (a religious act) so too today many Christians want nothing to do with this new world order that is being ushered in on COVID. We can use all the legal remedies afforded to us. We can choose not to bow to their new god (scientism), but that might mean we will be thrown headlong into the furnace.
May God return for us before tribulation begins.
95. pg 138 Why were christians who were thrown into severe prisons tortured also by prisoners? Do prisoners hate christians too?
I think there could be an element of this, that Christianity is hated by others universally. This Jesus predicted. But, I think there may also be just a mentality of violence in prison populations, and these Christians are being thrown in among a pack of wolves. If the Christians began evangelizing, that would bring the ire of monsters and the demon possessed, which I’m sure there are not a few behind those walls.
96. pg 139 I state as the US system unravels persecution against christians will increase. He wants to know why destabalization leads to more christian arrests.
That was a poor choice of wording on my part, unravels. From the Christian perspective the world is falling apart. But, it actually is the replacement of the church age with a new dispensation, a new form of system influenced by Satan to deceive the nations. In fact, what Christians perceive as chaos, those under the devil’s spell see the opposite. They see finally a light at the end of the tunnel where they will no longer be under the judgment of a righteous God. So it is not the chaos that brings persecution, it is the shifting of the underlining paradigm by which the earth and the people operate. Never before would a doctor state natural immunity was useless, that an artifical vaccine (that doesn’t even work) is the only solution. But thy are Isaiah 5:20.
99. pg 145 Who in christianity believes their life on earth will last forever?
Many if not most Americans deny their own mortality. Too many ignore the ramifications of it to the very end, and then find themselves suffering under feelings of shame and guilt and anger and resentment. Either people place their hope in science and technology or they simply live in a perpetual state of denial that their life will at some point be required of them. Many within the church hold onto the hope that they will escape death in the rapture, but there is no guarantee we are even in the end times. It is because of issues like these that I’ve focused my research on personal eschatoogy, on the nature and ramifications of death and what occurs afterward.
102. pg 149 Why was persecution the norm for those during the reformation and after yet it is the exception for us?
Reformation persecution was much different than persecution of the first century or what will possibly come in the future for the American Church (if it is the time of the end and we are seeing the new world order rise to power). The persecution of the reformers was at the hand of the Catholic Church, and the persecution of heretics was later at the hand of the reformers. This is why the church, throughout history, has been her own worst enemy because she lives and leads by the flesh and not by the spirit of God (if indeed they were or are saved at all). I think we will be very surprised at the outcome of the separating of the wheat from the chaff at Judgment Day.
103. pg 149 Elaborate on dominion theology as a heresy that turns christianty into a quasi-political movement much like the israelite zealots of the first century.
I’ve never really heard of dominion theology before, but I’ve seen it in action without realizing it. It is a theology dominate in pre-mill and post-mill theologies that seems to think we should be part of the political system in America to bring about the Kingdom on earth. Unfortunately, this is in direct opposition of John 18:36.
- pg 151 Can persecution be something we should try to avoid and defeat? Or should christians accept and embrace it as a testimony?
I don’t think there is a valid argument for revolution or overthrowing a government (even a tyrannical one) or sparking an uprising. This is against what the Bible clearly teaches. Especially in light of the current fall (or perceived fall) of the United States, it is clearly to fulfill prophecy and to usher in the new world order. We are prescribed with options. We can flee. We can obey up to the point where the government violates God’s law or command, in which case we must passively resist (no violence as this is vengeance). If then the government wishes to persecute us, we are instructed to endure with all joy for being counted worthy of sharing in Christ’s suffering and death.
- pg 151 Did world war 2 have a net benefit? Was it a godly war? Is there any net benefit to any human war?
There are always shades of benefit or harm in every given earthly or human event. If the world had allowed Hitler to continue, he would have swept a large part of the world (if not all of it) and existence today would be much different. Godly? In the sense that God was in control of everything that happened, yes. In the sense that God condoned or condones fighting and bloodshed. I couldn’t say. There was war in heaven also and angels are warriors. Is God a man of war? He would not let David build the temple because he was a man of war, so I would have to argue that God is not. Judgment Day and the second coming of Christ will certainly bring war and death and carnage to the entire world. And this warfare is certainly considered right and godly. Human wars, though, that are driven by politics and agenda could not be categorized the same way.
- pg 151 Read slaying leviathan by glenn sunshine.
I have put this book and Rules for Reformers on my reading list, but I will have to say I’m not certain it is really relevant. I have no interest in saving the republic. God is in control and I accept whatever he has determined for this country, for this culture, and for the world. I think my time would be better served memorizing the Bible, and prayer.
- pg 151 Are all christians called to be pacifists? Are there any exceptions? Is pacificism the exception and war and violence at the hands of christians the norm?
This is a difficult question. There are many examples and instances where the life currently live in peace and prosperity and leisure are founded on the death and torture of Christians and countless others who sought freedom and liberty for all. But, that doesn’t mean we are to fight with each other. It doesn’t mean I’m to pick up arms. Especially if it is in retaliation for a wrong someone has committed against me. Instead, the Bible tells us to forgive 70×7 and if someone steals my cloak to give them my other one also. To turn the other cheek. Suffer wrongs and provide love in return. We are, as believers, strangers and sojourner on this earth. We do not belong here. We are not part of this system of things that is developing before our eyes. May God rapture us today that we do not have to be subjected to the wrath of our God.
- pg 152 Is forming a malitia revenge or the love of neighbor?
Another difficult question as I am struggling with this exact dilemma. I’m behind enemy lines if the US breaks up tomorrow. The Western states will most certainly turn to fascism and I am declared by my religious exemption as a Christian. But, the majority of my region within the state I live in is conservative. It is only the enclaves of the major cities to the north that are predominately radical left. If my countrymen tomorrow banded together to fight at the front of a civil war, would I fight? Could I fight? To protect this way of life. To protect my neighbor. To protect the church from persecution, torture, and death? I don’t really have the highest opinion of any of these, but does that mean they should perish? Is this a mute question? Will the UN bring a military force with China and Russia leading the way to put down any opposition to the new world order? Would uprising be futile? These are important questions to consider as annihilation draws ever nearer.
- pg 153 Do all experience suffering as part of the curse but not all experience persecution which is separate? thoughts?
These two statements are inherently correct. For even the affluent who are born to money and wealth and privilege suffer from too much of everything. So yes, all do suffer to varying degrees. I’m sure there are exceptions to this rule as some are born to comfortable lives with enough money in trust funds that they want for nothing and have no need to work or suffer hardship of any kind.
Likewise, persecution does visit some and not others it appears, at least from the record of Church History. I think the standard leans toward persecution while those in America have been born, lived, died for generations within a blessed state of religious freedom and genuine tolerance.
- pg 161 Does the bible differentiate between pastors, deacons, and those who are not?
Yes, but the only mention of a professional, paid clergy is the doctrines of the Nicolatians, which is something God hates. The distinctions in the Bible between these are gifts, not offices. There is no biblical pastor. This is a manufactured clergy in the modern era when it became difficult to find men who qualified to be elders in the Church. This led to the Moses principle of shepherding by a single man with a church board, structured not from the Bible but after the secular corporate institutions of capitalism.
- pg 164 Were the early church fathers influenced by platonism in their view of death?
This depends on which father you are referring to. Some held to Jewish ideals of death while others ascribed to ideas of the underworld. Origen thought humans to be on a perpetual karmic process of reincarnation between Human, Angel, and Demon.
- pg 165 I stated that the american church is not the martyr church. but he states there are american missionaries who have died. thoughts?
There have been American missionaries that have died for their faith. But I would argue this is much different than the Church in China that has to exist under continued persecution in their homeland. The first century church was not persecuted only in foreign lands. They were persecuted at home. In Rome. A handful of martyrs from America fails to make the cut.
- pg 168 I state that contradiction abounds in America as people are sad for those who have died yet they believe they are in heaven. He states these two are not contradictions. thoughts.
I’m not certain how this is not a contradiction. I could see if they were sad because their loved one had died, and viewed death as unnatural and that being dead was an unnatural state of existence, neither alive in the body nor resurrected in the afterlife but stuck in between, a disembodied spirit in Hades or Paradise (unless this is one and the same or one a subset of the other). But this is not the view. Typically, people are torn apart emotionally because someone has died. Yet, they speak of them being in heaven as if it is a good thing, but it almost appears as if they don’t really, truly believe it. Why do we have funerals instead of celebrations for the Christian? I think there might be something to the unnaturalness of the death state that drives our anxiety and melancholy, if even unconsciously.
- pg 170 What distinquishes between soul and spirit?
The soul is the innate part that distinguishes the individual. It contains within it the conscience, consciousnes, thoughts, feelings, emotions, will, heart (metaphorically), memories, and it is from here where human volition and purpose are derived.
The spirit is the spark that animates (quickens) the body and soul combination creating the “living being” or “living soul” which is distinct from the “soul” that is disembodied at death and before the resurrection in the state known as death or the intermediate state.
At death the body returns to the earth, the spirit returns to God, and the soul is carried away to Paradise or Hades to await judgment day.
- pg 172. I state there is no evidence for biblical anthropology except for the bible itself without it there would be no argument with monist materialism. He states that monist materialism reduces itself to absurdity. see Bahnsen.
- why be rational?
- what is the origin of life?
- why think in terms of scientific inference?
- why think in terms of general principles?
- why be moral?
Bannsen asserts that the above questions tear apart the materialist’s viewpoint. But, my argument in this section was not about whether or not materialism was inherently logical, but that without the testimony of Scripture we would have no means by which to argue against materialism. We as believers, in a way, are also circular with our reasoning as we claim that the Bible message is true because the Bible authenticates itself. At least for my own personal life, I add to the message of the Bible the direct evidence of supernatural intervention. Direct spiritual experience.
- pg 173. Is death a release from the misery of life only for the believer or for all people? Is death a release or a punishment, penalty?
This has been viewed in a variety of ways over the course of philosophical thought. Some would argue that death is the release from the misery of life and, as such, death is a good. Others would argue that life is the good and death is an unnatural punishment for sin and, thus, death is the evil. The Bible though is pretty clear. Death is the payment for sin. It causes the unnatural separation of soul from body and both from spirit of God, and thus renders the dead to exist unnaturally until the resurrection. What this actually means, how it is actually experienced by the dead is unclear. But I doubt that death is pleasant. Curiously, though, Paul was eager with anticipation for death. Then again, his life was more miserable than most.
- pg 174. Do the dead experience time? Are they bound by or within time? Do they exist instead on a separate plane of existence that is outside of time? If no time, do they still experience within a sequence of events? How does Lazarus or Abraham experience time in paradise? How does the rich man experience time in torment in Hades?
There are no definitive answers to these kinds of questions simply because we have no direct accounting of said experiences other than accounts provided in the Bible. It is unclear if time, as a property, still exists after death. It is unclear what kind of substance the soul is or what shape it must take (if it operates in space at all). We can see from the Lazarus and Rich Man account that they all appear to be conscious and if conscious and aware then it is probable time passes in some fashion. The Rich Man does appear to be lucid and still possesses his rational faculties, despite his predicament. But, other than that, it remains a mystery.
- pg 177 I state that most are resentful at death. He wants to know resentful of what?
As already discussed above, many are resentful of death sneaking up on them, of them not being prepared, of the emotional strain death has on them, because of the feelings of being cheated, as if they did not have enough time or they had been guaranteed more time. Many are resentful of the loss of control death brings, at the loss of people and of future experiences.
- pg 177 What does it mean in 1 co 15, transformed? Did Enoch and Elijah experience transformation without tasting death?
ἀλλαγησόμεθα (changed) = 1 Co 15:51
μετέθηκεν (took) = Gen 5:24
ἀνελήμφθη (taken) = 4 Kings 2:11
This transformation is the putting on of immortality by mortality. It is taking possession of that which we were created originally to possess. Paul talks of being “changed” while Moses says God “took” Enoch and he was not. The same is the case (though different Greek words are used) for Elijah, as he was “taken.”
It does appear as if these are the same processes at work, but three distinct and separate events. What exactly occurs cannot be assertained. It is the revealing of the sons of God (as in our human group, not the angels of the OT).
- pg 177 I state that once the individual has a proper definition of death they can move beyond death and have a more stoic mindset. He wants me to elaborate on this. What is my meaning here?
I should have said move beyond the fear and anxiety of death. Once one realizes that there is nothing tethering them to this earthly plane, they’re entire mindset shifts away from the cares of this world and focuses more acutely on the afterlife.
- pg 178 I state 3 options for death. 1. radically alters our consitituion, 2. isolates us from the world of the living. 3. may neutralize our conscious awareness. He states nope. Elaborate on this. why is christian orthodoxy against soul sleep? Why are the cults for it? Isn’t it possible that evolution is correct and there is nothing beyond materialism and that death marks the cessation of the individual consciousness?
I do not personally ascribe to soul sleep, most specifically because it violates the Lazarus and Rich Man account. I’m not sure why the cults obsess about it. Maybe this is part of their delusion, getting hung up on error.
It is certainly possible there is nothing beyond our physical reality and that death is the cessation of brain activity and the individual ceases to exist. There is no evidence for it just like there is no evidence for an afterlife. These are presumptions based on traditions that have formed over thousands of years. Well, materialism is actually a highly volatile modern reaction to the afterlife tradition, or more specifically, to a God that presumes to judge them.
- pg 181 I cite the christian unwillingness to worship the roman gods in first century. He states refusal to accept woke ideology could become the same thing in modern times. Elaborate.
I would absolutely agree with this statement. In fact, I think this is happening and forming as we speak. It is a new form of paganism developing among the masses. I’m not certain what is causing it, other than demonic influences taking over the minds of the lost, but it appears as if lines are being drawn and if you do not pledge fealty to the state religion (and cast the pinch to ceasar) you will become an outcast and the blame for all that is wrong in the new empire.
- pg 185 I cite acts 2:27-31 as evidence for hades being the single repository for the dead. He doesn’t see how this passage supports this claim. elaborate.
Jesus was apparently sent to Hades at his death. If God had left him there, then it sounds as if Hades would have been the eternal resting place for all the dead. Maybe this was the devil’s intention when he first enticed Eve to eat of the fruit, that all of humanity would eventually die off, be trapped in Hades and have no means of escape. This of course is purely speculation as we have no idea what Satan’s argument is against humans, save for the one he presents against Job.
Combined with the Lazarus and Rich Man accounts, it stands to reason that all go to Hades, or at least the majority go to Hades, with a subset being contained somehow in the oceans, but death holding all under its sway.
- pg 187 Please provide more supporting evidence for there being two resurrections.
Revelation 20:5-6. The first resurrection intimates there is a second resurrection. Same with there being a second death intimates a first death.
- pg 189 Is Rev 6:14/Isa 34:4 hyperbolic language at judgment or future prophecy and should be interpreted literally.
There is nothing in the passages that would indicate hyperbolic language. The context does not demand it at all. A plan, straightforward reading of the text indicates a future prophecy to be fulfilled at the end of days when the physical dimension we exist in collapses in on itself and passes away.
- pg 190 He comments that he views hades as hell and the lake of fire as worse than hell. What is the definition of hell? What is the history of its linquistic use in the bible? Is there a hell at all? Should it be called something else?
This has already been addressed above. But to summarize, there actually is no “hell” in the Bible. There is Hades/Sheol/Paradise, Tartarus, and then distinctly Gehenna and the Lake of Fire. The first three are the first death or the unnatural separation of the soul from the body and spirit, where the disembodied soul is placed in either Hades or Paradise. The fourth is the subcompartment of Hades, the deepest parts of it, where the fallen angels of Genesis 6:2 are imprisoned awaiting Judgment Day. The last two are the second death where Satan, the false prophet, the fallen angels, and all the lost on earth will be cast and will endure eternal torment forever.
I’m not certain the etymology of hell. I would assume it was a translational issue at some point in the transmission of the texts, probably in the Latin. Once the synonym was used to replace the different words, over time, distinct doctrines (or generalizations) began to develop in theologies resulting in just a hell. You could view Hades as hell and the lake of fire as distinct. This is the important aspect that is often overlooked. Hades is typically glossed over or not included at all and the dead immediately go to hell, then are pulled out of hell at the rapture only to return to hell after the judgment. This is not biblical.
Personally, I would prefer soul sleep, as it would fit much better with the overall schema, as an unconscious person would immediately go from death to judgment regardless of how much time had passed between them. But, this violates several passages in Scripture so it is not the case.
To say Hades is hell and the Lake of Fire is distinct and worse is actually correct functionally. But there really is no need for the insertion of the world Hell at all in the text. It only confuses people. Now, because of the additional word, there is need to re-explain what the Scripture already says but modern translations got terribly wrong. I’m not certain, either, if the synonym was used because the doctrine to combine already existed at the time the word came into use, or if the word was used for another reason and the doctrine developed afterward, because a lack of knowledge of the original languages.
This can be seen in a pastor’s use of Re 13:16 stating the KJV uses “in” instead of “on” and that the modern translators perverted the text. Unfortunately, looking at the underlining Greek we see that the word used here for “in” is ἐπὶ and it most often translated “on.” Of the 875 times it’s used, only 89 times is it translated “in.” The word is used twice in the same verse for “in/on hand” and “in/on forehead.” Same exact word in Greek. Now, the KJV was modeled after the Geneva Bible and oddly it has the first instance in this passage as “in” but the second instance as “on.” So the KJV changed this translation. There may be something implied in the grammar, but I think on or in works in either spot. To say the mark of the Beast must be an injection because of the word “in” means the interpreter is not doing careful exegesis. I would bet there is a grammatical reason for all the modern translations to use “on” instead of “in.” This is the same kind of poor exegesis happening with the word hell.
- pg 191. What is the nature of the 1st and 2nd death? He states 1st death is the judgment of adam. 2nd death is the judgment of covenantal unbelief. 1st death leads to temporary soul torment for unbelievers. 2nd death leads to eternal soul and body torment for unbelievers. Is this correct?
The first death may have originated with Adam but it is certainly exercised with each one of us as it rips our soul from our bodies without our consent and, if the biblical account is right, imprisons us in disembodied existence without life. We exist but we are not alive. This is why I think, regardless of where we are in the intermediate state, it is not going to be pleasant. Whether paradise, hades, or even Tartarus for the fallen angels, separation of soul from body is not natural and I’m betting not preferable to embodiment. Everything in existence, including God, is embodied. Paul said everything has a body. Spiritual bodies. Terrestrial bodies. The only two beings existing that are not embodied at any given moment are the human dead in the intermediate state and the disembodied Nephilim who are wandering the earth as unclean spirits (and they appear desperate to embody something, anything).
I’m not certain what covenantal disbelief is exactly. First death is the separation of our soul from our body and the second death is the eternal judgment of the lost, which is, in reality the full payment for sin for those who have not been covered by the blood of the Lamb. We escape from this second death because we place our trust and faith in Christ Jesus, and because of his willingness to shed innocent blood, he was capable of paying the price for our sin. At Judgment, as I understand it, God will see us, we will be judged and found guilty for everything we’ve said and done, but then the court docket will show that our sentence has been paid in full. We are released therefore as a purchased possession of Jesus.
The second death is not just eternal torment. I think this is not necessarily intentional on the part of God, but is a bi-product of the reality that the second death is utter separation of an existing, living creature from the presence and connection to their ultimate Creator forever. Imagine what it must be like, if Col 1:17 is correct and all things, moment by moment are somehow held together and consist by the will, force, and sovereign decree of Jesus as the Logos, what happens when that tether is finally and irretrievably severed and the individual is cast into outer darkness? Your very atoms that make you, the substance that consists of your soul, your faculties, your mind, your memories, everything that makes you who you are begin to come apart at the seams. Yet, you have experienced the 2nd resurrection, you have put on immortality, so it is impossible for you to cease to exist. You remain a living, breathing entity, with all your senses, all your faculties of reason and cognitive abilities, and yet you are set adrift, banished from the one who intimately created you. Just the gravity of it has got to be some monstrous burden.
- pg 193 I ask the question of other redemptive narratives after our own and he states no. Eschatology is about the end of sin, fulfillment of redemption and eternal justice.
I ask is that all? Are we, humans, the focal point? Why then the angels and other spiritual beings? Why the animals and the rest of creation? Why the universe? Why create the spiritual realms whatever they actually are? Is there not a pattern here? First the angels “hidden” origin story. Then humanities’ narrative where we become “like the angels” in the afterlife. Yet there is no mention of what we will be doing in the city after all is said and done. There is no mention of what the purpose is for the planets or the galaxies or the entire physical universe (other than signs in the sky for times and seasons).
I think there is more to the story. There is certainly more to the angelic origin story and I think there is a reason why it has been hidden from us. It will provide clues to what comes next and for some reason God doesn’t want us to know what that is.
- pg 195. I state the world, the physical realm, is a figment of our imagination. He states it is not. Elaborate and defend.
This was already discussed above. The double slit experiment is pretty conclusive. Something is happening there that should not be happening if the physical world is external, finite and as it appears. The Bible also hints at a much larger reality that subsumes our physical dimension. But, again, we are not given all the information. We are not privy to all the data because of our limited faculties and our limited technologies and because of the restraints placed on our perceptions (as exampled by Elisha seeing the mountains of chairiots of fire, or angels existing invisibly in and around us, the transfiguration, as well as drug induced hallucinations of strange creatures that seem surprised you are there and can see them – are these really figments of our brain or altered states with the ability to perceive other dimensionalities that are just as real as our own, probably more so).
- pg 195. I state that neither the bible nor god has ever promised a good life. He states the OT law promises many good things. Expand and defend the position that a good life has never been promised to any individual. Provide examples that in actuality, we are promised suffering and misery and persecution in this life, especially if we are Christians.
God shows no partiality. We are given the lot we are given in this life (Matt 5:45; Acts 14:22).
- pg 198 Illustrate a distinction between suffering and persecution.
Suffering is experienced by everyone to one degree or another. It is the plight of the fallen man. We get sick. We experience loss because of pride or attachment. Persecution, on the other hand, is designed by God as work for us to walk in for a particular purpose of declaring his name to the lost. Suffering is a consequence of our fallen state. Persecution is our participation in the suffering and death of Jesus Christ. Suffering, in the end will cease and be forgotten. He will dry every tear. Sickness will be no more. Loss will be no more. But persecution and the record thereof will stand through eternity as the faithful witness of the saints of God.
- pg 198 Persecution has been a warning for decades, especially from dispensationalists. I would assume this means that we should not expect persecution since this is what they always say. If he is referring to modern history (the history of America) why have dispensationalists been warning for decades that persecution would come? Why would their decades of warning invalidate those warnings?
I think quite a bit of the prophetic crowd simply likes the drama. The date setters and the prognosticators, they are either trying to rile up their base or want to sell their latest book. Dispensationalists, of course, populate this camp because they are futurists. Prophecy is yet to be fulfilled. And, as a snare God has set, no one knows the day nor the hour, not even the Son. The time of the gentiles I think is a very specific number. He knows those who are his. If he counts every hair on every head, then I’m certain there is a specific number he is waiting for, for they have been created from the foundation of the world to enter into the body of Christ by way of graft during this dispensation.
Despite all the false claims over the decades, I think we can all agree we are closer now than we’ve ever been to Christ’s return.
- pg 199 Were the founders of the US postmill? What were their actual religious affiliations and beliefs?
It doesn’t matter. From their own words they founded the US not based on Christianity but on a much more broader idea of protecting the people and their religious pursuits from the interference of the government. They new that all governments instinctively move toward tyrrany. They wanted to protect everyone, not just the Christian. They were not forming a theonomy.
- pg 199 Is the bible against enjoying things and building wealth?
No. But, there are strings attached. Much is given, much is required. The wealthy will not only be held accountable for what they say and do but how they used the excessive resources they were entrusted with. A human really only needs so much. It is not debatable. Comfort level is. But actual sustainability and survivability is not. I live quite comfortably on less than $500 a month, and put the additional $500 I make each month into savings. In my perspective I am quite wealthy. I want for nothing. I need for nothing. I never go hungry. I’m never not warm. I always have a roof over my head and electricity and a computer and internet – even in the woods camping!
But, we are to put ourselves second to the saints and to the poor. I might be judged harshly for saving my second $500 / month instead of helping the poor. I might be judged harshly because I live in a 2 bedroom house and did not invite a stranger living on the streets to come live with me. I might be judged harshly because on my commute to work in bitter cold temps I pass by a homeless guy hitch hiking because I don’t want to be bothered and am fearful of the other, despite having plenty of time, plenty of money, and an empty passenger seat. Look how severe my account potentially appears. How much more so will be the condemnation of the couple who hords away 1-2 million and lives in a house with 7 rooms and 4 bathrooms and has a summer house on the shore, and a 100inch tv set in both living rooms. What have they done with their resources? Even if they are Christian and give their 10%, do you really think God is going to be okay with that, if they spend the other 90% on wine, women, and song or extravagance?
For much is given, much will be required.
- pg 202 He states it is ironic that I seem to view persecution as normative not just unsurprising, yet I hate that American freedom is ending. Elaborate.
Oh, what the flesh truly is! I completely agree there is a strong dichotomy here. Paul talked about the war in the flesh, and the things he wanted to do he didn’t do and the things he didn’t want to do he did all the more. American freedom is all I’ve known. It is what I was born into. It is the culture and the way of life I was raised in. It is the context I’ve lived in all my life. My entire existence! Of course I’m saddened that it may very well be ending. I’m also extremely angry that my generation and the generations before me could have done something (maybe) to stop this slide into oblivion. But people (including myself) were too busy living and enjoying life and their freedoms to be concerned that the next generation was being wholesale indoctrinated and brainwashed. Well, we reap what we sow. Christians have been warning for years that people needed to pull their children out of the public school system. Yet, the majority did not and now they’re surprised when their adult kids come home from college and they are a shell of who they raised them to be. They are infected with the mind virus.
I do think persecution is the norm, simply because 1. Christ and Paul both told us if you become a Christian you will be persecuted for your faith. 2. most of christianity around the world is persecuted by either their government or by other religions. For whatever reason America was spared that for the length of its existence. But, I think that is now over and the sifting of the wheat is at hand.
- pg 202 He states if I view persecution as normative then I should be happy to see persecution coming.
I’m not happy to see someone being persecuted or beaten or tortured or killed. But I’m excited and anxious at the ramifications. Will we see the new world order? Will we see a third temple be built? Will we actually see the antichrist come to power and take the world in his sway? Will we witness the war he wages against the saints? Or will we actually be raptured before it all begins? Or will we go through the first part only? Go through it all?
If it is actually happening and this is not just another false start, that means we have a front row seat to the end of the world! That is fantastically exciting. Have I been chosen worthy to share in the sufferings of Christ? Will I cower and comply at the last minute? Or will I stand in the final hour confident and loyal to the cause of Christ? What works has he prepared for me to walk in if these are truly the latter times?
I can’t hardly stand it!
- pg 202 He states if I think persecution shouldn’t be avoided then I should be okay with the wokification and communification of america.
Part of me is okay with it, certainly. I’m thrilled to see the churches being swept up in it and the falling away beginning to take shape. They were a bastardization of the faith for a long time. They deserve this delusion. Keep in mind, I did not call for revolution or uprising in the dissertation. It was not an option I presented because I don’t think it’s valid, nor do I think it would be effective.
Of course, I also don’t want to experience persecution, fear persecution, and worry I don’t have the faith to endure persecution for any length of time. All I can do is hope and pray, if God has entrusted this to me, he will make ready my will and my stamina and my endurance to suffer for his name sake that I will not be a worker that needs to be ashamed.
But, as much as I don’t want to see America fall, I also have no allegiance to a country that has lied to me, tricked me into indentured servitude and then abandoned me when I needed them. I have no loyalty and no nationalism. America deserves whatever is coming her way.
- pg 202 He states that I seem to hate the corporate/professional church and consumerism/greed, yet you also seem to hate that america is turning to a marxist philosphy that always ends in poverty and wealth destruction (always? not for everyone).
This seems to be a restatement of a previous question, but I wanted to address the last section, that marxism always ends in poverty and wealth destruction. This is simply not true. It ends in poverty and the destruction of assets for 99% of the population in question. But the 1% of the revolutionaries that created the system in the first place typically live in decadence. Look at North Korea, USSR/Russia, former USSR country-states (their politicians looted the state coffers and fled leaving everyone else destitute), Cuba – the list goes on and on. Communism is simply a grab for power and enrichment by a few while leaving the rest in shambles.
- pg 202 He states my persecution theology is consistent with premill theology. Elaborate, summarize. Agree or disagree.
Since I’ve started researching millennial theology (after my dissertation was completed) I would agree that I side predominately with premillennial views. But, that is to say, I (at least think) I was premilennial because of the reading of the text and not because of some other external influence. I’m sure Missler had something to do with it. But I can’t get away from the plain reading of the text shows a 1000 year millennium which appears to occur after the tribulation but before the great white throne judgment of the resurrected.
I think there will be a great falling away first (which we are starting to see now) and then the antichrist will appear and he will gather the nations and will wage war against the saints. When the rapture happens, I’m not yet certain. I hope it is pretrib. I’m thinking, though, it is mid-trib or post-trib at the seventh trumpet. This is when “The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Messiah, and He will reign forever and ever.” This appears to occur after the tribulation.
In the end I will most likely end up post-tribulational, though I need to do more research on this subject. I am certainly pre-millennial and futurist in my theology and that does naturally come out in the dissertation.
- pg 202 He states my anti-wokism would be more consistent with postmill theology. Explore this.
I think an anti-woke position should be part of all the end times theologies. It is a blight, a parasite on the church and on the world. It is evil and should be resisted as should the new world order. But, that doesn’t mean I don’t think it’s inevitable and that the saints (the church) will succeed during this time. The Bible says she will not, that she will suffer persecution and be killed. Personally, I’m rather shocked that this kind of heretical ideology has taken so much of the church so called today. Then again, it was easy to spot the heretical ideas in the modern church years ago. I was able to spot it shortly after becoming a believer, when I sat down and systematically read through the Bible. It was clear to me then the modern evangelical church (and the other sects) are not following the biblical model. They are malformed. They have injected into “Christianity” doctrine of men and doctrines of demons. I can only conclude the great falling away has begun.
- pg 202 He states if persecution is noramative, how did christianity happen and how did america happen?
How did Jehovah’s Witnesses or Mormons or the Gnostics or Jones Town happen? Lack of persecution does not negate the growth of heresy or false churches. It appears as if American Christianity was founded on postmillennial theology which is faulty to begin with. Combine that with traditions of men (modern church structure, rules, tendencies) and you have a recipe for a church and religion built by man rather than by God. I think this is the big difference and cause of our missundertanding. You view the modern church in America (and around the world) as the church Christ is building. I do not. I view it as a man made structure that the church is found in here and there. But modern evangelicalism especially has no claim to Christ or Christianity. It is an aberration.
- pg 202 He states your Enochian material is fascinating, your persecution research is relevant, and your death research is important. Comments?
Thank you for the kind words. I agree, the Enochian material is quite amazing. It’s even more amazing that the modern church has suppressed this knowledge for so long, since Augustine. I knew there was something about Genesis 6:2 when I would read it, and specifically about the “revealing of the sons of God” and the “we will be like the angels,” but I couldn’t find the unifying tether. But then I stumbled onto a podcast that mentioned Dr. Heiser and then it all came together.
My death research is very important to my personal academic goals. I want to plump the depths of what is available here and see if more cannot be ascertained concerning the end of life, death, and the intermediate state. Unfortunately, I fear I will hit a wall shortly that I will not be able to get around until my own death. It makes me a little nervous, because I don’t think death is really innately a good. I think it is unnatural and punitive and I think this is why the human body or our instinct seems programed to fight against death at any cost.
- pg 202 He states that post-mill, theonomy, and preterism are more helpful in understanding the bible, history, and our present moment. comments?
I personally think this is a twisting of Scripture to make it look better to the sensitive conscience. It is a means by which one can shift focus from being ever watchful for Christ’s return and not investing in the here and now and in the earthly things, and toward growing families, amassing wealth, and enjoying the things of the earth. We are warned against this in the Bible. I personally lean toward futurist views because of my great anticipation for not only the end but for the judgment. I want this earth to burn and everything and everyone on it. I don’t personally view this world or its system of things to be all that great, despite having a pretty great and leisure life. It’s as if, despite these material and lifestyle blessings, I can still see the world for what it is, as it truly is, and I’m not interested in participating in that. I have no interest in participating in NWO and I definitely have no interest in the church so called of this world (comprising of humans) forming a global theonomy to rule the people. I personally think humans have proven they are incapable of ruling with God’s law each other or themselves. I look for Christ’s return so that he can physically, bodily rule for 1000 years and then for eternity where who knows what will come next.
3. I used the quote Matthew 10:16-33 as a future event. My advisor asked for a preteriest interpretation as well.
To state that “scripture is occasional and historical” is to miss the basic, fundamental hermeneutic employed by the first century NT writers when handling the OT. There were several references they made of OT passages, applying their fulfillment to themselves or ascribing meaning to those passages that were obviously not contextual to the original audience. Jesus did this numerous times but none so blatantly than Lu 4:20ff. Yes, they did speak to those to whom the documents were originally written. But they were also written for us, for our learning, for our use in establishing doctrine and theology, for correcting others, and for preparing us for what is to come, and for prophetic fulfillment.
In He Shall Have Dominion, the postmillennial view states, “warnings of persecutional suffering apply to the original recepients in a direct, relevant, and important way. We misconstrue them if we universalize them so as to require the continued persecution of the church until the second advent.”
The problem with this statement is:
1. it fails to acknowledge applicative process of the Bible is unique and not as a normal document.
2. requiring it to apply only to the original audience violates Jesus, Pauls, and the rest of the NT authors interpretaive approach.
8. Pg 18 He wants a preterist interpretation of Philipians 1:29.
The idea that “scripture is occasional and historical” flies in the face of 2 tim 3:16 and Romans 15:4. Statements may apply to real people in their original settings but (all of it) also is for our edification and some are specifically for latter times (and not to be understood in the context of the original audience).
In Thine is the Kingdom, he states, “the kind of suffering that would undermine postmillennialism is wide-scale external opposition against the Christian faith.” he also states, “if American Christians claim we are under persecution here in our country today then we diminish the very grievous persecution of the NT saints.”
19. pg 24. Preteriest interetation of 2 the 2:3.
This is viewed by Hodges as a spirit of antichrist that extends throughout the church age and is also said to be assumed by many to be the papacy.
If either Nero or any or all of the first century Roman emperors are identified as the man of sin in II Thessalonians 2:3, 8, why is it that they were not slain with the breath of the Lord’s mouth by the public appearance of Christ at His coming (v. 8)? If there were more than one emperor, were there multiple appearances and comings? But how could this be, even with the “breath of His mouth” being understood figuratively to refer to the preaching of the gospel? This should be the case according to the postmillennial understanding of “a sharp sword” coming from the mouth of the rider upon the white horse in Revelation 19:15. But, even if so, how is the appearance (epiphaneia) of Christ’s coming (parousia) in verse 8 explained as having historically occurred in the “slaying” of Nero or any other of the Roman emperors? Can such teaching be accepted as contextual exegesis?
In Context! Evangelical Views on the Millennium Explained, he explicitly states, “a careful reading of II Thess. 2:3, 4, 8, and 9 should suffice to convince anyone that we are here dealing with a precise prediction of a certain, definite person who will receive his doom when Christ returns. . . . (4) He is not to be identified with the line of Roman emperors. . . . [T]he entire context here in II Thess. 2 is eschatological. It has to do with ‘the end’ of the present dispensation. . . . This fact is an insurmountable obstacle in the path of the ‘Roman emperor’ theory. . . . (5) He is not Nero Redivivus (Nero brought back to life). Neither the entire line of Roman emperors nor any one particular Roman emperor is meant here. Thus, for example, Antichrist is not Nero. . . . (6) He is not the pope. . . . Naturally, the idea was eagerly seized upon by many of the leaders of the Reformation . . . [and the] Westminster Confession speaks very positively [that the Pope is Antichrist.[70] But it stands to reason that if the man of sin is a definitely eschatological person, he cannot be the first pope, nor the second, nor the third, etc., neither can he be the collective concept ‘the papacy.’ It is true [however]. . . that any man . . . may be called ‘an antichrist,’ one among many of the final antichrist’s precursors. . .”
“Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition”
21. pg 26 Preterist interpretation for 2 Tim 3:12
Strimple in three views on the millennium and beyond counters Gentry’s postmillennialism by quoting 2 Ti 3:12, then states, “persecution, apostasy, antichrist, these find no place in the postmillennial vision, but they are essential elements in the NT picture of the last days. By means of his preterist reading of the Olivet Discourse, 2 Th 2 and Revelation, Gentry tries to assure Christians that the wrost days of persecution, apostasy, and the antichrist are past.
Why is it that Postmillennialism stresses eschatological optimism in the New Testament while de-emphasizing eschatological pessimism? Both are true are they not? Is it not true that “[I]n the world you have tribulation, but take courage; I have overcome the world” (John 16:33)? Is this verse restricted to the apostles or does it also have application to all believers of the present dispensation? Why does Preterism in particular explain away present-day application of much New Testament teaching on apostasy and persecution by relegating such passages as Matthew 7:13-14, Luke 18:8, II Thessalonians 2:1-10, I Timothy 4:1-3 and II Timothy 3:1-5, 13 to the past and present but not to the future? Why is much of the Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24 and almost all of the book of Revelation relegated to the past, that is, up to A.D. 70? Is it because of presupposing and then imposing a preterist hermeneutic upon the text, or is it the result of objective contextual exegesis?
30. pg 41. I make a comment that the church should be more focused on christ and the second coming and he states there should be included a preterist option.
I’m not certain how a preterist option here would be beneficial since it is a dissertation on future persecution against the American Church. The preterist would argue that all efforts should be put forward to the spread of the gospel, to the evangelization of the whole world, since this is how the Kingdom will be ushered into the world, the setting up of a theonomy run by the Church. Yet, I’m not certain I understand the multitude of denominations will agree on what laws to pass and which heretics to punish. Church History is replete with examples of earthly theonomies and how terribly brutal they were, universally. The Christian church is in no condition to rule civil government any more than the civil government is.
My biggest issue with presenting postmillennial options in the dissertation is that I personally view this theology as invalid. It leaves a whole host of prophecies simply unfulfilled and, as with most heresies, puts humans in the driver’s seat. The Kingdom will come only by human effort rather than Christ building his church.
42. pg 52 He wants me to investigate preterist postmill concerning “this present evil age”(Ga 1:4).
Gentry states that we already experience resurrection spiritually. but what about this passage indicates at all that we are spiritually resurrected? What does that even mean? But, if we are living in the millennial reign of christ how is it that this is the millennium yet there is sin and teaching and the church is still existing in an evil age?
It is argued that in eph 1:21 paul is not illustrating a distinction between life on earth and life in heaven but between two distinct ages (i.e. life before the millenial reign and during).
86. pg 120 Preterist interpretation of 1 Peter 5:2. If there is no persecution does that mean there is no church? If no suffering then we are not part of the church?
Actually, in the 10+ books I mined for this verse it never came up or was referenced once. I would wager they would say the “overseers” are leaders in the church tasked with being examples for the masses so that Christianity could spread and take over the world, establish theonomy and rule until Christ returns.
I would certainly argue there is no church constituted by the artifical organization we know today as the “modern church.” Just because it claims to be a church does not mean it is sanctioned by God, by Christ, or is in line with his will. I would wager there are “churches” so called today that have no individual believers that are actually a part of the church universal that Christ is building (i.e. LGBT condoning). Certainly, the majority of evangelical Christianity would agree the Mormon church is not part of the church Christ is building, yet they are convinced they are the only ones in that universal church. Same could be said for the Jehovah’s Witnesses. But there is no real way to tell. There is no litmus test.
The modern church today is more aligned with the Nicolatians with their professional clergy, and Jesus was clear how he felt about them (Re 2:15). There is, in reality, no “pastor” in the Bible, and especially so as it is expressed in the modern churches. Likewise, there are no professional clergy, no titles, but functional gifts.
Is the church the church if there is no persecution? I would say there is no telling if a particular local church is actually part of the universal church Christ is building until there is persecution to test it’s faithfulness. Jesus said he knows his own (2 Ti 2:19). I would imagine the view from his perspective is much, much different than our view from here. It is quite possible (and probable) that he sees the Church in much different ways than we could even possibly see her. Maybe he has a blind spot for her and cannot see her imperfections. Maybe he only sees what she will become in the end? Maybe we are all deluded by a strong delusion and the 7th Day Adventists are correct or the Jews are church correct, or the Mormons.
There is no way to determine where the Church Jesus is building is at or looks like or consists of at this moment or at any moment through time. All we have, though, is the Word of God, which states, “In the world you will have tribulation; but be of good cheer, I have overcome the world” (John 16:33).
92. pg 128 what is the preterist answer to possible persectuion in america today?
Hodges states that the papacy is the persecuting power of the antichrist today. It not only persecutes but justifies persecution and avows to enforce its dominion by rack or stake wherever it has the power to do so.
97. pg 140 He wants a preteriest option for john 16:2
There was no reference to it in the 10 books other than rebuttals to postmillenialism based in part on this reference. as Stimple writes, “Jesus nowhere predicts a glorious future on earth before the end of the world, as postmillennialists posit. On the contrary, the things he himself experienced are the things his chrurch willl experience.”
The american church has not experienced this persecution since its inception. And even that persecution was not by outside influences but was from internal friction (christian on christian).
98. pg 142 He states preterist option knew destruction of isreal was coming 1 pe 4:12
There were only two results for this passage and they were not commented on at all (in lists). If you meant that there were preterists before the destruction of the temple and isreal in 70 AD that is anchronistic. They were in no way expecting the destruction of their city or their temple. They were expecting a political messiah to come and deliver them from the romans and usher in the jewish kingdom. Instead, they were destroyed for not knowing the time of his coming (Lu 19:44).
100. pg 147 He wants preterist option for acts 14:22.
There really were no references to this passage, save for a generic one in He Shall Have Dominion where the author uses it as support for the fact that the church promotes Christ’s kingdom by preaching and uring others to enter into the kingdom. But this verse says nothing of this. It is simply stating that Paul and his companions said this to believers in Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch that, “we must through many tribulations enter the kingdom of God.”
There is no preterist limitation on this verse. It did not happen a single time for the believers in those specific cities, but continues on for all believers. If Paul was convinced that those individuals (as well he and his companions) had to experience many tribulations to enter why can we arbitrarily presume modern Christians will not enter the kingdom the same way? Preterists might want to historize this passage away to convince themselves there will be no persecution in the future, but such contrivances have nothing to do with the actual text.
101. pg 148 He wants preterist option for John 15:20; 1 pe 4:15-16; 2:20; Matt 5:11.
John 15:20 – again, just wishing for persecution to go away to make yourself feel better or to paint a brighter tomorrow for your children or grandchildren has no bearing on the reality of Scripture. To argue that John 15:20 is only for the first century disciples violates the very logic of the statement. He says, “a servant is not greater than his master.” If this be true, how is it that the first century church is not greater than Jesus and suffers along with him, but modern American Christians are somehow better or distinct or different and don’t? You cannot argue that it’s because the kingdom is coming and things are getting better over the course of history because it is objectively not. Things have not only gotten worse, but we can see in recent political and cultural events a tremendous move by political operatives toward a global, one world government. This is prophecy being fulfilled before our eyes!
1 Pe 4:15-16 – already addressed above.
1 Pe 2:20 – not mentioned in the 10 titles referenced.
Matt 5:11 – again, so because persecution is only for the first century and we will not experience it in modern times, does that mean the kingdom of heaven is not ours? Will the kingdom only be populated by first century disciples? The twisting of scripture is rampant in postmillenial theology. It does not make logical sense.
108. pg 152 He wants presterist option matt 10:37; luke 14:26-27; 1 Co 7?
Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26-27 – Oddly these two verses are referenced in He Shall Have Dominion, but to point out that the fellowship of the church is deeper than even family relations. My use of these verses points to the future events of persecution (and also applies to persecution during the first century) that we will have to love and obey Christ over and above our loyalty and fidelity to our families, and even our very lives. Mark 13:12 and Matt 10:21 point this out, “brother will deliver up brother, father his child, children their parents and wil cause them to be put to death.” Again, this was specifically delivered to the believers in the first century, but since all of Scripture is profitable for sound doctrine then there should be no issue applying these passage to our loyalty to Christ as well. Do you really think the liberals, progressives, the fanatical CRT adherents don’t want to kill us?
There are many on the left who are vocal about violence:
https://www.thewrap.com/hollywood-stars-donald-trump-violent-death-kathy-griffin-snoop-dogg/?ampcf=1
https://meaww.com/joe-biden-calls-america-unite-heal-david-cross-blood?&cf=1
1 Co 7 – It is true that Paul had eminancy in mind concerning the second coming of Christ. He states in vs. 29 “time is short, so even those who have wives should be as though they had none.” Preterists, of course, will use such statements as referencing all prophecy being fulfilled by 70 A.D. It is an issue and an element in my future research, determining what Paul and Jesus both were talking about with such temporal statements. I have not, thus far, heard premillennial explanations for this that are logically adequate.
132. pg 196 preterist option for Lu 21:34-36; matt 25:13.
So, we would be hard-pressed to explain how Jesus’ words were fulfilled here in Lu 21:34ff in the first century. They were to make sure they were not carousing, getting drunk, or caring about their petty life concerns. This is the same both then and now. But “the Day” he says will come as a snare on “everyone” who dwells on the earth. Not only this, but he’s prescribing to them the remedy to “escape all these things that will come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man.”
Did the Day come like a snare on all who dwell on the earth? When? How do we know? A snare works with surprise, quickly, suddenly, and most often with severe consequences for those who are caught unaware. Nothing like this has happened to the “entire world.” Such things certainly have happened to specific regions. It has happened historically to Israel in 70 A.D. But it was not global, which this passage is predicting.
In matthew 25:13 we see in the postmillennial interpretation a similar understanding, that we are to always be watching and prepared for his return. Though, I think this is more theoretical than applicable for many or most who take this view. If the millennium is now or soon to be now and its fulfillment will be completed at the hands of Christians on earth and Christ will not return until it is complete, then it does stand to reason that individuals would not be looking for his immediate return. This has likewise been expressed to me at least twice now from postmillennialists, that they were motivated to move away from dispensational premillennialism because they wanted a future for their families and grandchildren that was not so pessimistic and bleak.
If personal, practical, or theological comfort is the driving force behind this view, then it is a direct violation of trying to save one’s own life.
……………
Received from adviros on 8-26-21.
Comment on statement from advisor:
“I recommend you consider creating a “survival” guide of sorts for Christians and churches facing technological tyranny in Western cultures.”
This could be a promising project in the near future, and I would need to hash out major segments of it before I could begin. One challenge is I’m still undecided on whether Christians are better off presenting themselves to authorities and being out in the open with their profession of faith or if they should flee, hide, and seek refuge either in the wilderness or in neighboring regions.
I think the future persecution that will come to the US will be unlike what was experienced in the first century because of the advancement of technology. If I’m correct, there will be no place to hide effectively. There will be no means by which we will be able to live within the new society or function in the one world government. Yet, somehow the antichrist will wage war against the saints and will overtake them (Dan 7:21).
I would be tempted to focus on wilderness survival within a Christian context of persecution, but there are plenty of books on wilderness survival already and with the short time left (I presume) I’m not certain those efforts would be beneficial. With the state of publishing today, I’m not certain writing a book would be a benefit either. A podcast or blog might be more effective. An online courses even could be more useful than a book. Then again, a workbook course as I’ve designed could be highly effective since it utilizes all aspects (lectures, podast, articles, blogs, books, and asynchronous interaction) to help equip the faithful.
Lastly, I’m conflicted on the product aspect of these endeavors. Do I want to charge? Do I need to ? Do I want to make money off the church? Also, is there really a genuine need for this at all? Or, would I and the church be better served if I devote myself to memorizing the Bible (we may soon not have access to it), learning to survive in the woods, so I can be prepared to help as many as possible when persecution begins?
These are questions I need to wrestle with.
Steven S Veach 
Leave a comment