There are three basic objections to the idea that the papacy is the Antichrist. The first is easy to answer from Scripture, the second is a legitimate point that isn’t as easy. The third is complicated to explain. The first objection is that Scripture clearly refers to one man of sin, a future personal opponent of Jesus Christ. The papacy is an institution, not an individual. The second objection is that the pope is often an example of moral living, and generally does no evil. The final objection is that, because Catholicism is Christian, the pope is not denying that Jesus Christ came in the flesh.
Archive for the ‘Eschatology’ Category
Answering Objections to the Identity of First Beast
Posted by Cory Tucholski on May 18, 2009
Posted in Eschatology, Papacy, Roman Catholicism, Sin, Theology | 6 Comments »
The First Beast of Revelation 13 Demystified
Posted by Cory Tucholski on May 11, 2009
The pseudonymous TurretinFan, both on his blog and on Alpha & Omega Ministries, has identified a number of arguments that Protestants should avoid when addressing the errors of Catholicism. While I agree with much of the list, I wanted to take this opportunity to clarify one particular argument that we should avoid, and that is arguing that the Pope is the Antichrist.
TurretinFan rightly points out that there are major historical reasons for believing that the Pope is the Antichrist, the Beast of Revelation 13:1-10. It is extremely difficult to articulate those reasons in a short conversation for a few reasons. First, most people are ignorant of the rampant symbolism in Jewish apocolyptic literature. It is difficult to build a firm foundation so that they understand all of the issues at hand in the time often alloted for these short witnessing moments.
Fortunately, with a blog post, that restriction is gone. This article will answer, once and for all, why we Protestants who understand these issues will never submit to the papacy.
Posted in Eschatology, Papacy, Roman Catholicism, Theology | 7 Comments »
Demon Locusts of Revelation 9 Demystified
Posted by Cory Tucholski on August 7, 2008
This article is going to be very controversial. The vast majority of Christians today are futurists in regard to Revelation. A futurist believes in a literal fulfillment of the book of Revelation sometime in the (near) future. By contrast, a preterist believes that all of the prophecies have already taken place in the first century a.d. These are the two main viewpoints of the prophecies of the book. There is a third view that is less popular today than it was during the Reformation, that is the view of historicism.
I subscribe to historicism, though I have studied very little of it in-depth. Historicism calls for a much more consistent hermeneutic than do the other two viewpoints. It utilizes the same interpretive method for revelation as for Isaiah and Daniel. The language of Revelation is symbolic, not literal, in the historicist interpretation. The identities of the characters (Two Witnesses, for example) within Revelation are subject to much debate among historicists; they only agree on the identity of the Antichrist (succession of Popes) and the Whore of Babylon (Roman Catholic Church itself).
Historicism is the belief that the events of history, beginning with the fall of the Roman Empire and proceeding to the present day have fulfilled the prophecies of Revelation. If you think about it, that makes the most sense of the three interpretations. It means God hasn’t been waiting in the wings for 2000 years with no prophetic words from above. It means that He has been working in history, and allows us to know that He is with us in history by proper reading of Revelation (hence the blessing to all who read it and understand it).
Since many people have found this site looking for an answer to the demon locusts of Revelation 9, I thought I would provide an explanation for what I think that this passage really means. This entry is really a summary of this article. It is in accordance with the typical historicist view of Revelation.
Of the demon locusts, Scripture says this:
And the fifth angel blew his trumpet, and I saw a star fallen from heaven to earth, and he was given the key to the shaft of the bottomless pit. He opened the shaft of the bottomless pit, and from the shaft rose smoke like the smoke of a great furnace, and the sun and the air were darkened with the smoke from the shaft. Then from the smoke came locusts on the earth, and they were given power like the power of scorpions of the earth. They were told not to harm the grass of the earth or any green plant or any tree, but only those people who do not have the seal of God on their foreheads. They were allowed to torment them for five months, but not to kill them, and their torment was like the torment of a scorpion when it stings someone. And in those days people will seek death and will not find it. They will long to die, but death will flee from them. (Rev 9:1-6)
Protestant scholars of the nineteenth century saw with amazing unanimity the rise and spread of Islam in this passage. Why? First consider where the locusts came from. They came from the “Abyss.” One of the finest Islamic scholars of the twentieth century, Abul A’la Mawdudi, wrote a book to introduce the English-speaking world to Islam. His subtitle called Arabia, the center of Mohammed’s activities, the “Abyss of Darkness.” The phrase “bottomless pit” in the above passage is actually the word for “abyss” in Greek. This prominent scholar used the exact words of the Bible when describing the center of Mohammed’s activity.
Why locusts? Because of the Arabs’ connection to the locust. The Ismaelites, forerunners of the modern Muslim, have as their national insignia a locust in the Bedoween romance “Antwar.” There is also a story of Mohammed that has locusts falling into his hands bearing the inscription “We are the Army of the Great God.” So here are two connections, but it doesn’t stop there.
Consider the appearance of the locusts:
The locusts looked like horses prepared for battle. On their heads they wore something like crowns of gold, and their faces resembled human faces. Their hair was like women’s hair, and their teeth were like lions’ teeth. They had breastplates like breastplates of iron, and the sound of their wings was like the thundering of many horses and chariots rushing into battle. They had tails and stings like scorpions, and in their tails they had power to torment people for five months. They had as king over them the angel of the Abyss, whose name in Hebrew is Abaddon, and in Greek, Apollyon. (Rev 9:7-11)
The Arabs were widely renown for their skill with a horse; according to Adam Clarke it was as if the horse and the rider were one. The Muslim wore a yellow turban as a crown, according to the poem “Antwar.” As for the face and the hair, according to Scripture a man is not to shave his beard (Lev 19:27), and the long hair of a woman is her glory (1 Cor 11:15). Arabs of the day were described as having shoulder-length hair and beards. The teeth of the lion probably represented their ferocity in battle. The breastplate reminds us of the Koran’s statement that “God hath given you coats of mail.”
The tails and the stings of the scorpion were likely references to the Muslims’ ability to shoot backwards accurately while in full retreat. The power of their tails probably represented the poisonous doctrines of Islam that they were spreading to the world.
Now, the Muslims tortured the world for more than five months. This, of course, is five prophetic months, based on the formula of one day = one year (cf. Num 14:34, Ez 4:6, and Dan 9:24). That means that the Muslim invasion lasted 150 years, which we see from history, is the exact time that the Muslims continued to invade territories. After a century and a half of conquest, they turned their attentions to literature and science, leaving the Christian world at peace.
What of the other limitations placed on the army? They couldn’t harm vegetation. The Koran commands the Muslims to leave the vegetation in invaded territories alone. Muslim armies were also commanded to leave the monks in the monestaries alone and monestaries were not to be burned. These people, the Muslims thought, had God’s seal of protection on them. The Muslims were not allowed to kill the church, only torture it. That is, they couldn’t destroy the church, but they did set a series of calamities on it for five prophetic months.
For further reading on this topic, I recommend historicst.com. There is a wealth of articles dealing with the fulfillment of the Revelation prophecies in historic events.
Posted in Bible Thoughts, Eschatology, Theology | 8 Comments »
Too Tired to Blog
Posted by Cory Tucholski on May 26, 2007
I just spent over two hours answering a post on Theology Web. It has drained my will to blog. So I leave with a little bit of Thom Tapp’s wit. Enjoy.
Posted in Eschatology, Humor | 2 Comments »
Somebody Call Jack Chick!
Posted by Cory Tucholski on May 18, 2007
Ninety years ago, the Virgin Mary appeared to three children in Fatima. The apparition, since called “Our Lady of Fatima,” made three predictions to prove that she was who she claimed to be. One vision was a lake of fire. One vision was of Russia becoming Christian again. The third was never revealed, and has been the subject of much speculation.
Many accuse the Vatican of hiding details about the end of the world. The vision, according this group, revealed exact details about the end of the world. The Vatican has been accused of suppressing the details, hiding it from the general public. Why? To what point and purpose would they hide something like that?
It seems that when people ascribe certain behaviors to a group, especially a large and monolithic entity like the Vatican, they forget that such an organization acts in the best interest of all the people involved. In other words, there is a reason that they do everything that they do. There is no particular reason to hide this final vision, if it indeed was integral to the end times.
All of the Scriptural indicators of the end times are in place. If the Vatican has advanced knowledge that the rest of us don’t have, then now is the time to show it, so that all who call themselves Christians can be better prepared in the Tribulation. Of course, I’m a historicist, so I believe that the Tribulation is going on now as I (along with all the faithful) await the Second Coming of our Lord and Savior.
Of course the Vatican denies that they are hiding anything. The Vatican’s Secretary of State and second-in-command of the Catholic Church, Tarcisio Cardinal Bertone, explained that they are not hiding anything, and all of the visions have been revealed. The third vision, he explains, predicted the assassination attempt on Pope John Paul II. Not only has the former pope declared this, but it was confirmed by Sister Lucia (the last remaining Fatima visionary) on her deathbed in 2005.
This has all the makings of another anti-Catholic, conspiracy laden, historically false Chick tract.
Guess what the crazy part is? I believe that the Catholic Church is telling the truth. Why? Because to what point and purpose would they lie about something like this? If they really had inside information on the end of the world, it would help all of the faithful. If that is the purpose of the Church, to serve the faithful, then it only makes sense that if they had the information that they should share it.
There is, of course, a Scriptural reason I don’t believe that the vision of Fatima heralds the end of the world. Jesus said that no one knows the hour except the Father alone. Now, if Jesus didn’t know the appointed hour of the end times, why in the world would anyone believe that Mary knows?
Yes, I make fun of Chick tracts. They’re poorly drawn and evidence of a man with a deteriorating grasp on reality. But many of them are really good, they do present the gospel message in a readable and fun way, and they can become excellent witness tools if used properly. In the case of Mary, I couldn’t have said this any better myself, so I’m not going to try! Common sense forces me to disagree with the part of this tract that connects Mary to ancient pagan deities, but neither do I know enough comparative theology to authoritatively dissent with what Mr. Chick reports. I have a general enough grasp on ancient mythology to say with certainty that the deities (and their roles) are accurate as presented. It isn’t a great leap forward to assume that they are the foundation of the Marian dogmas. But I think that by taking Christ out of the limelight using devotions to Mary, as well as declaring the pope “Vicar of Christ” and each priest an “alter Christus” (another Christ) and declaring the sacrifice at Calvary an ongoing sacrifice in the Eucharist that the Roman Catholic system exerts control over the faithful by asking them to place trust in the Church and not in Christ.
I still don’t believe that the Church is suppressing details about this vision, as many authors and Vatican watchers suspect. But I do believe in the message of this Chick tract wholeheartedly: Rome’s gospel doesn’t save. Only Jesus Christ does that, perfectly with each life the Father calls to repentance, with the sacrifice offered once for all upon the cross.
I’m no fan of the Catholic Church, but I don’t believe that they are hiding anything about that either. I don’t believe it because if Jesus didn’t know the appointed time, there is no way Mary would. That Catholics even think that she might saddens me just a little bit.
Posted in Eschatology, Humor, Mariology, Roman Catholicism | Leave a Comment »
Rapture?
Posted by Cory Tucholski on April 24, 2007
For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord. Therefore encourage one another with these words. [1 The 4:16-18]
The Rapture. It’s a nice thought, being saved from all of the horrible judgments described in Revelation. Global deception followed by war, then famine and disease, then death. The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse ride forth from the Scroll, when the Lamb breaks open the seals. Martyrs by the thousands follow, then a great earthquake complete with the sun being blotted out and a blood red moon with falling stars round out what are called the Seal Judgments.
That is only the beginning. The Trumpet Judgments are much worse, including and especially the Fifth Trumpet: demon locusts pouring from the Abyss, stinging all nonbelievers (Rev 9:1-11).
Things get worse as the Vial Judgments are poured out: Boils (Rev 16:2), the sun burning people’s flesh (Rev 16:8-9), and darkness over the throne of the Antichrist (Rev 16:10-11).
It is extremely comforting for the Christian to hear of the Rapture: the catching up of all the faithful souls, first the dead and then the living, to meet with Christ in the sky and be with Him forever.
The predominant eschatology we see today makes no attempt to interpret the prophecies of Revelation. Instead, it looks to their literal fulfillment in a seven-year timespan at some point in the near future. This will be preceded by the Rapture of all the faithful Christians.
It’s convenient. Christians won’t share in the judgment of mankind. That’s always nice to hear. But who are these martyrs in Revelation 6:9-11, who were yet to join the others under the altar?
I’m afraid that Christians are to share in these terrible judgments. Am I scared? You bet I am; we all should be scared. I’m not comforted by the Rapture, since I believe that it will follow at the end of the judgments. I am, however, comforted by two things related to the end times.
First, I’m comforted by the fact that God is in control, and He makes all things (good and bad) work out for the faithful (Rom 8:28).
Second, I’m comforted by the fact that the prophecies given in Revelation have, for the most part, already happened.
Fans of the Left Behind series, and students of Tim LaHaye in general, are reading this post thinking, What the heck is this guy talking about? Well, that is what I hope to answer by examining, in depth, the historicist view of eschatology. It attempts to interpret the prophecies of Revelation in a similar fashion to the way that the symbolic language found in Isaiah and Daniel was interpreted. This is how students of Scripture knew to look for Jesus’ coming in the first century A.D. We will use historical events of the past 2000 years as the fulfillment of the prophecies from Revelation.
Historicism isn’t claiming to be an infallible interpretation anymore than the Left Behind novels are claiming to be prophecy. The sad truth of the matter is that only God knows the true meaning of Revelation. Historicism, unlike Futurism, is an attempt to understand 2000 years of human history from God’s point of view. This is the real meaning of the blessing promised to those who understand Revelation (1:3).
Historicism can be refined in light of new evidence. Historicism gives us an impetus to study the past and try to understand it. Futurism can only wait for fulfillment.
No matter the school of thought one subscribes to in eschatology, the urgency to disseminate God’s word is no less. Futurists, preterists, and historicists all await the Second Coming of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. We believe that it will be soon, as some interpretations of Scripture we all agree on are coming to pass now: widespread apostasy, increased rebellion against God, religious apathy, and a veritable treasure trove of false teachers. The reconstitution of the nation of Israel was another sign all three schools of thought awaited.
The urgency created by these signs, therefore, necessitate aggressive evangelism and a continued push for God’s truth to be taught to our children. The last hours approach, quicker than anyone probably expects, and we are called to save as many as we can.
In the next series of entries, I will detail the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse from a historicist perspective. I expect I’ll be very busy over the next few weeks, so I don’t know how quickly these articles will come. I will also put the finishing touches on the Jesus Tomb article.
This should prove to be an interesting few weeks for everyone concerned. Stay tuned.
Posted in Bible Thoughts, Eschatology, Father, Jesus, Theology | 1 Comment »
I Contribute to a Screwball Award Winning Site!
Posted by Cory Tucholski on February 15, 2007
Apologist J.P. Holding of Tekton Apologetics Ministry has awarded one his coveted Screwball of the Month Awards to a site I write for, GotQuestions.org. The disputed page reads thus:
The amillennial view comes from interpreting unfulfilled prophecy differently than how non-prophetic Scripture and fulfilled prophecy are interpreted. Non-prophetic Scripture and fulfilled prophecy are interpreted literally or normally. But according to the amillennialist, unfulfilled prophecy is to be interpreted allegorically, or non-literally. This is called using a dual hermeneutic. Hermeneutics is the study of the principles of interpretation. The amillennialist assumes that all unfulfilled prophecy is written in symbolic or figurative language. Therefore, the amillennialist will assign different meanings to those parts of Scripture than the normal, contextual meanings of those words.
The problem with interpreting unfulfilled prophecy allegorically is that this allows for a wide range of meanings. Unless you interpret Scripture in the normal sense of how written language is interpreted, there won’t be One meaning. Yet God, the ultimate author of all of Scripture, did have One specific meaning when he gave Scripture to be written to the human authors. Though there may be many applications to life from a passage of Scripture, there is only one meaning, and that meaning is what God intended it to mean. Also, the fact that fulfilled prophecy was fulfilled literally is the best reason of all for assuming that unfulfilled prophecy will also be literally fulfilled. The prophecies concerning Christ’s first coming were fulfilled literally. Therefore, prophecies concerning Christ’s second coming should also be expected to be fulfilled literally. For these reasons, an allegorical interpretation of unfulfilled prophecy should be rejected and a literal or normal interpretation of unfulfilled prophecy should be adopted. [source]
Well, I can’t say that I agree with the passage’s argument. I believe that prophetic visions, such as Revelation, are allegorical symbols with keys in other Scriptures. The writers are arguing for the Tim LaHaye school of thought, which, ironically, does utilize the double hermeneutic. For example, we ascribe a meaning of one year to a day in the vision of Daniel’s seventy weeks. However, when discussing the Antichrist’s rule in Revelation, the same idea of forty-two months is described as forty-two literal months.
Why the double hermeneutic? Revelation is clearly using the same symbolic language of Daniel. Isn’t it infinitely more likely that we’re talking about a reign of forty-two prophetic months, or 1,260 years? This is also applied to the creatures of Revelation: the Beast is a man, but the demon-locusts are literal demon locusts. Again, why the double hermeneutic? Either we’re talking about a great hulking beast and demon-locusts, or we’re talking about a man and an earthly army described by the symbols on the locusts.
But, I digress. I had always hoped to steer clear of the dubious Screwball Award, however indirectly I may have earned one. In this case, a flub in someone else’s eschatology posted on a ministry I associate with.
Obviously, we both can’t be right. I can only humble myself before God and pray that He shows which one of us is in error, swiftly, so that we (as teachers and defenders of His word) do not lead others astray.
But, I am proud to say, that Jerry from I Talk to God won a website award, and that I nominated him for it! So this month, I actually contributed to both sides of the Screwball Awards. Isn’t that a happy day?
Posted in Apologetics, Bible Thoughts, Eschatology | Leave a Comment »
Spiritual Low Point
Posted by Cory Tucholski on December 14, 2006
As I was driving to work the other day, I had a realization. I hate every last single thing about my job. There is not one redeeming quality about being a fast food manager. I absolutely loathe what I do for a living.
This really isn’t a revelation. I’ve known this for several months. I am just throughly trapped in this miserable existence because I need the salary and the insurance benefits carried with it. What came as a bit of a shock to me is that today I realized that I have to force myself to write.
Why is that so bad? The one way that I have seen to get out of the fast food trap is to open my own freelance writing business. That idea was the only thing in months that has given me a glimmer of hope in an otherwise worthless existence. It feels as if right now, all I do is simply exist.
With Jody’s blessing, I have spent some money to advertise said business. I have joined FaithWriters and I have joined Sologig–two websites that exist to connect freelancers with potential clients. Unfortunately, I have not created portfolios yet with these companies–neither of these companies will do anything for me until I do that simple action. Yet I find myself without motivation to do that. I barely find any purpose for getting out of bed anymore.
This is the same place I was in two years ago right before I quit Wendy’s. On some level, I knew that I would end up back here; I just never figured that it would be so soon.
I’m leveling with everyone who reads this for a few reasons. First, I promise all kinds of articles that never materialize. This is the main reason why. Second, I want everyone to understand the depression and the cycle that it creates. Finally, I wanted to lay the groundwork for this announcement:
Effective immediately, for an as yet undetermined time period, the apologetics on this site will focus on orthodox or abberrant theologies. I will stay away from giving answers for atheists because I do not feel spiritually strong enough to resist the siren’s call of no accountability to God that atheism presents. The arguments presented on God is Imaginary were not without some merit. This is a very dangerous line of thought that I have no desire to follow to its inevitable conclusion.
The articles for God is Imaginary will stay up, but I will not add to them except in a “I have nothing for the stinkin’ website and I’m desperate!” situation. Perhaps after I get over this rough patch in my life, I will start adding some additional articles.
For now, I will focus on heresy and orthodoxy. In both of those, a theistic worldview is presented and there is no argument against the existence of God.
The new list of potential topics to cover looks a bit like this:
- Examination of open theism – there may be some truths contained herein, but the God of open theism cannot be trusted
- Examination/refutation of probabilistic prophecy – thank you, John Sanders
- Study of Romans 9 and Calvinism/Reformed Theology – J.P. Holding at Tekton has presented a very good case against the one James White has presented
- Examination of the Word-Faith Movement (headed by Ken Copeland, Joel Osteen, and Benny Hinn)
- Examination of Prosperity Theology – a variation on Word-Faith that a friend at work had experienced, and turned her away from the faith for a while
Pretty much looks like the old list with the God is Imaginary material removed.
I still plan to have a domain name by the first of the year. It’ll be something I buy with Christmas money that I will undoubtedly receive from my family.
I will also continue my lively debate with Geocreationism. I’m also going to take a closer look at his (?) site. I know I’ve personally been seeking a model of creation that agrees with the science rather than a model that opposes the science. It would be nice if science and religion could actually get along someday!
Apologists should be able to pick a side and defend it. But here, I’m just not sure. On one hand, it sounds like a fun concept. The Left Behind world, though theologically misguided, is a rockin’ good world to immerse yourself in. A video game is long overdue. On the other hand, is this really the impression we want to give an outsider? That if you don’t convert to Christianity, we’re going to kill you in the aftermath of the eventual war that ends all wars? People already consider Christianity intolerant because of our belief that only calling on Jesus will save you. I don’t think that it is a good idea to create a video game with the ultimate goal of building a Christian theocracy; this is going to give unbelievers the wrong impression.
That makes them harder to evangelize.
Finally, Paul Barnes will be in my prayers. He resigned his ministry, the one he founded in his own basement and God built to huge megachurch, over his homosexual behavior. It was brave of him to come out of the closet and get the thorn in his flesh exposed. I pray for his family, and his congregation, that they will be able to put this shock behind them and begin the healing process.
Posted in Creationism, Eschatology, LGBT Issues, Personal, Site News | 2 Comments »
