Jesuit Illuminati New World Order and WWW III

Leuren Moret: MH17, like MH370, is failed Jesuit false flag, using 2 Ukrainian missiles to undermine Putin & BRICS, protect Israel, and trigger WWIII

Vancouver, BC – In an ExopoliticsTV interview with Alfred Lambremont Webre, independent scientist Leuren Moret exposes both the methodology and motives of the false flag operation Malaysian Airlines MH17 as a highly coordinated but failed Jesuit false flag operation that used Ukrainian air traffic control on July 17, 2014 to divert flight MH17 over war zone Donetsk, while MH17 by Ukrainian air force interceptor that used an air to air missile to destroy one of MH17’s two engines. As MH17 made a sharp left turn trying to stabilize, a Ukrainian BUK missile deployed two days earlier in the Donetsk area completed shooting MH17 down. Immediately NATO controlled media began to blame Putin and Russian controlled rebels in the Ukraine. On July 22, 2014, Russia released the full radar and other data that evidenced the above scenario as true.

The basic methodology of MH17 false flag is based on Operation Northwoods, a planned 1962 false flag proposed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the US Military which planned to shoot down civilian airliners over the USA, blame the Cuban Air Force, and provide a false pretext for a US invasion of Cuba. Then President John F. Kennedy rejected the plan

Motives for MH17 False Flag

In her interview, Leuren Moret details the major motives for the flase flag, starting with the shooting down of Malaysian Airlines MH370 and MH17 as the bookends of the US government's "pivot to Asia". The MH17 false flag was designed to:

• Set up Valdimir Putin as the patsy to the flase flag and brand Putin as an amoral aggressor;

• Attack and undermine a contemporary meeting of BRICS leaders in Brasilia after the World Cup to set up the BRICS central bank as a competitor to the US dollar;

• Divert public attention from the ongoing Israeli invasion of Gaza;

• Serve as part of a trigger-mechanism to a humanocidal WWIII, part of the Illuminati depopulation policy to reduce world population to as low as 500 million from 7 billion.
• By targeting Malaysia Airlines, warn other Asian nations against charting an independent economic course as Malaysia has done, and serving payback for the war crimes judgments against Illuminati nations United States and Israel by the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal

Report on MH17 False Flag (27 pages)

You can review this 27-page analysis of the false flag, as well as a description of the NATO drill that accompanied the MH17 false flag while you watch this wide-ranging and revealing interview.

1. MH17 Verdict: Real Evidence Points to US-Kiev Cover-up of Failed False Flag

http://21stcenturywire.com/2014/07/25/mh17-verdict-real-evidence-points-to-us-kiev-cover-up-of-failed-false-flag-attack/

2. NATO Drill that coincided with MH17 false flag

http://m.strategic-culture.org/news/2014/07/21/mh-17-beware-of-the-chameleon.html

3. This article may provide useful context as to the MH370 false flag operation as you watch the interview. Part 1 - Leuren Moret: Confirmed – MH370 shot down by US over Singapore airspace as UK Inmarsat leads 30 day false flag psyops for 5 NWO objectives [READ FULL ARTICLE]
http://exopolitics.blogs.com/peaceinspace/2014/04/part-1-leuren-moret-confirmed-mh370-shot-down-by-us-over-singapore-airspace-as-uk-inmarsat-leads-30-day-false-flag-psy.html

4. VERY  IMPORTANT: This is the full Russian military briefing on MH 17 - July 22  (maps etc.)   (English translation)  and right at the start, the General reports MH17 off flight path about 7 mins before shootdown - crew could not get it back on flight path - either US Navy AWACS or US Navy ship in NATO exercise took over the MH 17 flight controls to position it for BUC hit.

Malaysian Airlines plane crash: Russian military unveil data on MH17 incident over Ukraine (FULL)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bNPInuSqfs   [29:18]

5. GERMAN PILOT: Shocking Analysis of the ‘Shooting Down’ of Malaysian MH17
This article has photos of 30 mm DU bullet holes from strafing the right wing tip probably when it hit the right engine with a small fighter jet rocket, and shocking photos of the cockpit exterior showing where very hot large and small DU fragments (all different sizes) from the BUK DU warhead launched head on into the cockpit region.  The warhead fragments into all kinds of pieces, and hit on the side we cannot see and ripped through the cockpit  exiting on the side shown in the photo (exit holes).  This shows definitively that the Ukrainian forces fighter planes in the air hit MH 17 from both sides, and that the BUK hit caused the plane to crash (it explodes and creates a spherical debris field that impacts the target from every direction.  The cockpit crew members were most likely also wounded or killed by the BUK missile.  No damage produced yet shows the cabin was directly hit - instead it looks like it got a shower of red hot DU fragments.  The direct targets were the right engine by one of the fighter jets, and the BUK missile targeted the front of the plane or cockpit area where the electronics to control the plane were.
http://www.anderweltonline.com/wissenschaft-und-technik/luftfahrt-2014/shocking-analysis-of-the-shooting-down-of-malaysian-mh17/

6. It was reported that the Ukrainian govt. military moved into Donetsk with 4 BUK launchers and 9 communications posts two days before MH 17 crashed.  It was also reported that two days after the crash, the BUK launchers were removed from the area.  This clip shows three BUK launchers loaded on huge trucks leaving the Donetsk area on July 19, 2 days after the crash.  Here is the documentation.
Ukraine Military Plated Transport Trucks Transporting Three BUK's out of Donetsk Republic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdDF8hIf2M4    [02:21]


7. U.S. Navy expert: "The entire MH 17 "exercise" was run by the US Navy ships with the NATO multinational exercises taking place offshore from Crimea.  Everyone in the NATO exercise was involved in order to implicate them in the crime just like MH 370  The US also had a new hi-tech satellite over the Ukraine during this time.  He also said the Ukrainian forces went into Donetsk two days ahead of the crash with 9 communications posts so they could synchronize everything with the NATO forces offshore."      

References

LEURENMORET.INFO

www.leurenmoret.info

Leuren Moret: MH17, like MH370, is failed Jesuit false flag, using 2 Ukrainian missiles to undermine Putin & BRICS, protect Israel, and trigger WWIII

http://exopolitics.blogs.com/peaceinspace/2014/07/leuren-moret-mh17-like-mh370-was-failed-jesuit-false-flag-using-2-ukrainian-missiles-to-set-up-putin.html

SOURCE: EXOPOLITICS.BLOGS.COM

Doctrine of The ANTICHRIST.

ANTICHRIST IS ANTI-GRACE AND HIS MARK IS THE TEACHING OF WORKS-BASED SALVATION

We will take an aside here to examine some things that will help us identify this pernicious and lawless Antichrist.  Going back to a verse we looked at briefly, that being the next verse from the pen of Paul:

“But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth” (2 Th 2:13)

Remember that Paul is being as wise as a serpent, but as harmless as a dove (Matt. 10:16).  He has purposely and openly declared to the Thessalonians who the evil restrainer is (Pagan Rome), but he has done so in a manner that would protect the church from undue persecution.  Now, continuing in this fashion, and directly following his statements, he offers a further clue as to the identity of Antichrist:

(1.)That God has CHOSEN and predestined those who would be saved through His own power is a clue to the identity of the one who would be ANTI-CHRIST, because this Antichrist will also deny this critical element of our faith.  Paul plainly exhorts the church at Thessalonica that they will not be deceived by this Antichrist, because GOD has chosen his elect, and has decreed that they will identify him.  Whereas in verse 10 he plainly states that the un-elect (reprobate) will be deceived about the identity of the  Antichrist because God has withheld the BELIEF OF THE TRUTH from them, saying, “they received not the love of the truth”, he now tells us that the gift of BELIEF OF THE TRUTH comes from God and is bestowed upon His elect alone!  God has from the beginning chosen those who would be saved by giving them the gifts of sanctification of the Spirit, and BELIEF OF THE TRUTH!

(2.)By identifying the Doctrine of Election with the great deception concerning the identity of Antichrist, Paul further establishes the fact that the Antichrist system will be known principally by its opposition to the Doctrines of Grace.

Let us see if John agrees with this assessment:

“Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.  But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things.  I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth.  Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.” (1 John 2:18-22)

In his dissertation on Antichrist, John makes some important statements that we would do well to heed:

(1.) Antichrist (the Man and System) is still to come.  John writes this epistle some time between 85-90 a.d., almost 20 years AFTER the destruction of the Jewish Temple.  Just as in the book of Revelation, John makes NO MENTION of a current Temple standing in Jerusalem, in fact John’s only mentions of the Temple in the entire book of Revelation regards the Temple that is in heaven.  There is no mention of the Jewish Temple AT ALL in John’s epistles, proving that the temple had already been destroyed, and that the revealing of Antichrist, and therefore the Antichrists destruction by the return of Christ was still future.

(2.) John states plainly that the Antichrist system is already in place (although in embryonic form), and that the System of Antichrist WENT OUT FROM US (verse 19)  This agrees with Paul’s statement that the Apostasy was already beginning, and would precede the revealing of Antichrist.  This also proves that the Antichrist would come from, and would claim CHRISTIANITY, and that their particular apostasy was one of false doctrine.

(3.) John asserts that the true believer has an UNCTION from the Holy One, and will not remain deceived about the identity of the Antichrist.  This agrees with Paul’s teaching that;

a)Election is the key to understanding the identity of Antichrist, and,
b)The Elect will not be deceived because they are to receive this truth through the gift of BELIEF from God.

(4.) John states that we may identify the Antichrist because in doctrine and in action they “denieth the Father and the Son.”  This is the evidence that we will examine next.

THE PAPACY DENIES THE FATHER AND THE SON

Let me first state that it is inconsistent and unacceptable that a teacher should commend the Authorized King James Bible as Holy Spirit given, while disdaining the plain statements of its principle human author (William Tyndale) and of its human translators (The King James Translators).  We have already shown in our previous essay that the King James Translators identified the Papacy as Antichrist in their introduction to that book.  Now let us read the words of Tyndale on this subject from his commentary on the 1st Epistle of John:

“Antichrist is one of the first who sees the light, and who comes and preaches Christ for a while, seeking his glory in Christ’s Gospel. But when he discovers that there will be no glory for himself besides that of preaching, then he goes and preaches that doctrine which is contrary to Christ. If he cannot disguise himself, nor his scheming, whereby his poisoned heresy is hidden under the bait of true doctrine, then is he a professed and open enemy.

 The Apostles were clear-eyed and spied Antichrist at once, and put him to flight, weeding out his doctrine quickly. But when charity waxed cold, and the preachers began to seek themselves and to admit glory, and honor of riches, then Antichrist disguised himself after the fashion of a true Apostle and preached Christ with subtlety and cunning, bringing in first this tradition, later that tradition, darkening the doctrine of Christ, and setting up innumerable ceremonies, Sacraments and images, giving them significations at first, but later their signification was set aside, and works were instead preached as holy deeds to justify, to put away sin, and to save the soul. Antichrist taught that men should put their trust in works and whatsoever was unto his glory and profit; and under the name of Christ ministered, leaving Christ out altogether, becoming head of the congregation himself.”

Tyndale goes on to say,

“Christ in the Scripture is called the holy because he only sanctifieth and halloweth us. And he is called Christ, that is to say, anointed, because he anointeth our souls with the holy ghost and with all the gifts of the same. Ye are not anointed with oil in your bodies, but with the spirit of Christ in your souls; which spirit teacheth you all truth in Christ and maketh you to judge what is a lie and what is truth, and to know Christ from Antichrist. For except he taught your souls within, the pouring of words into your ears would be in vain. For they must be all taught of God, John 6:45. And the things of God no man knoweth, save the spirit of God; and the carnal man knoweth not the things of the spirit of God. On the contrary, the spiritual that is anointed with the spirit judgeth all things, 1 Cor. 2:11-15. Therefore, we are forbidden to call any of us Master upon earth, Matt. 23:10, seeing we have all one Master now who is in heaven who only teaches us with his spirit, though by the administration and office of a faithful preacher.”

And specifically concerning Antichrist and the Papacy, Tyndale says,

“Forasmuch as Antichrist and Christ are two contraries, and the endeavor of Antichrist is to quench the name of Christ, [it is asked by our adversaries] how can the Pope and his sects be Antichrist when they all preach Christ? Say I again to thee, how was Pelagius Antichrist, whose doctrine the Pope defendeth in the highest degree, and how were all other heretics Antichrist? Verily, Sylvester the Pope did what all heretics do –- he abused the name of Christ. He gathered offerings, tithes and rents in Christ’s name, bestowing them to his own honor and not Christ’s. He brought the conscience of the people into captivity through superstitious fear, as though such authority was given him by Christ. And every syllable [in Scripture] that sounded as though it fit his purpose, he expoundeth it falsely and fleshly, and therewith deceived and bewitched the ears of the people, making them his own possession, to believe what he wished, as though it made no difference to them if he preached true or false; so they believed and did as he biddeth them.

 But all the texts which show the Pope his duty, he puts out of the way, including all the texts which set the conscience at liberty in Christ, as well as those which prove salvation to be in Christ only. With Pelagius he preacheth the justifying of works, which is the denying of Christ. He preacheth a false binding and loosing by confession to a priest which is not [grounded] in the trust and confidence of Christ’s shed blood. He preacheth the false penance of deeds, neglecting to preach that we rein the flesh so that we sin no more. Rather, he teaches that we make satisfaction to redeem our past sins. What else can this be but the denying of Christ, who alone made redemption for our sin? The Pope maketh of the works of the ceremonies, which were customarily used to be signs and remembrances of things to be believed or done, service unto God and his Saints which are spirits, to purchase with their merits whatsoever the blind soul imagines. All are the denying of Christ. For if thou wilt receive an anointing of grace or mercy from anywhere besides Christ, he is no longer Christ unto thee.”

So, concerning the 4th point we made above about John’s identification of Antichrist, Tyndale plainly states:

“Now, though the Pope and his sects give Christ these names, yet they rob him of the effect, taking their significations unto themselves, making of him a hypocrite, as they are  themselves. They be right Antichrists who deny both the father and the son. For they deny the witness the father bare unto his son, as they deny the son of all power and glory that his father gave him.”

OCCLUDING THE IDENTITY OF ANTICHRIST – JESUIT PROPHECY TEACHINGS


We have shown previously where the Testimony of the Spirit concerning the identity of the Antichrist is uniform throughout the Church age.  The martyrs of Christ, the reformed Bible translators, and the introduction to the Bible itself claim that the Papacy was the seat of Antichrist.  Now let us look at how (as prophesied by Paul and John) this Antichrist, working in the spirit of the wicked one, would occlude his identity to those who had not received the gift of a love of the truth.

The Above articles are extracted from the website of Michael Bunker entitled The Doctrine of the Papal Antichrist. You can read the whole article by Clicking HERE.

Antichrist: A Very Present Danger 

So then, in popular modern Christian doctrine the restrainer – be it the Church, the  Holy  Spirit  or  a  political  power  –  is  now  holding  Antichrist  back  somehow. This  doctrine  has  been  aggressively  articulated  without  ambiguity  in  modern Bible versions. A random sampling: 

RSV (1946): For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains it will do so until he is out of the way. 

New English Bible (1970): For already the secret power of wickedness is  at  work,  secret  only  for  the  present  until  the  Restrainer  disappears from the scene. 

New  Jerusalem  Bible  (1985):  The  mystery  of  wickedness  is  already  at work, but let him who is restraining it once be removed, 8and the wicked One will appear openly. 

Any reader of these modern versions must think the Bible teaches that only when the  restrainer  is  removed,  or  “disappears  from  the  scene  (NEB)”,  can  Antichrist rise  to  power  and be  identified.  And  what fear  this  causes  in  some  circles,  with people  searching  out  who  this  evil  man  is  going  to  be!  But  in  fact,  though  it appears more and more aggressively in modern Bibles, this doctrine of a future Antichrist is not a modern teaching. It is many centuries old, and long predated Tyndale. It is a doctrine that arose early in the Church, and by the 16th century it was  apparently  as  pervasive  among  Roman  Catholics  as  it  is  now  among Protestants, and also Mormons and other groups.  

But William Tyndale departed from the common view. His warnings, which have been forgotten or suppressed, are that Antichrist is a spiritual thing, and always a very  present  danger.  Furthermore,  we  must  watch  out  for  his  coming  as  a Christian imposter. In Christian Churches he will seek authority, professing faith and assuming appearances of faith, but in fact teaching so as to undermine the faith. “Mark this,” Tyndale wrote, “above all things”: 

Mark this also above all things – that Antichrist is not an outward thing, that is to say, a man that should suddenly appear with wonders, as our fathers talked of him. No, verily; for Antichrist is a spiritual thing. And is as  much  to  say  as  against  Christ;  that  is,  one  that  preacheth  false doctrine, contrary to Christ.  

Antichrist  was  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  fought  with  the  prophets;  he was also  in the time of Christ  and the apostles, as thou readest  in the Epistles  of  John,  and  of  Paul  to  the  Corinthians  and  Galatians,  and other  Epistles.  Antichrist  is  now,  and  will,  (I  doubt  not)  endure  till  the world’s end. But his nature is (when he is revealed and overcome with the word of God) to go out of play for a season, and to disguise himself, and then to come in again with new raiment. As thou seest how Christ rebuketh the Scribes and the Pharisees in the gospel, (which were very Antichrists,)  saying,  Woe  be  to  you,  Pharisees,  for  ye  rob  widow’s houses; ye pray long prayers under a colour; ye shut up the kingdom of heaven,  and  suffer  them  not  that  would  enter  in;  ye  have  taken  away the key of knowledge; ye make men break God’s commandments  with your  traditions;  ye  beguile  the  people  with  hypocrisy  and  such  like; Which things all our prelates do, but have yet gotten them new names, and other garments, and are otherwise disguised.  

There  is  a  difference  in  the  names  between  a  pope,  a  cardinal,  a bishop,  and  so  forth,  and  to  say  a  scribe,  a  Pharisee,  a  senior  [elder] and  so  forth;  but  the  thing  is  all  one.  Even  so  now,  when  we  have exposed  him,  he  will  change  himself  once  more,  and  turn  himself  into an angel of light (2 Cor. xi.).17

We can now see how Tyndale’s understanding would have led him to translate 2 Thessalonians  2  as  he  did,  showing  the  restrainer  as  presently  working  the mystery of iniquity. He had looked in all the Scriptures and seen that in the past the work of Antichrist had been accomplished through the religious leaders and false  prophets  of  the  Old  Testament  who  locked  up  God’s  word,  and  then  later through  the  scribes and  Pharisees  (“very  antichrists”)  of  Jesus’  time.  And  in his own  time  it  was  being  accomplished  through  popes,  cardinals,  bishops, priests, and monks.  

Therefore  as  to  Antichrist’s  “new  raiment”,  should  we  not  take  care  in  our  own Churches  and  professing  Christian  congregations  concerning  our  own  religious leaders and prophets, our pastors, priests, prophets, or elders, no matter by what names they call themselves or how they are clothed? For as Tyndale said, “the thing is all one” – or, in modern parlance, it is all one and the same thing.  

Of course I am not suggesting that all pastors, priests, or elders are of Antichrist. They are not, thanks be to God. But we must be alert for signs of Antichrist now. He sends his emissaries to lodge in the branches of Christendom wherever and as high up as they can climb. The apostle Paul said that that which ‘holds back’ 
was at already work when he wrote. The Scriptures confirm that antichrist was at work in the 1st century and warn of false apostles: 

For there are certain craftily crept in (Jude 1:4). 

Little  children,  it  is  the  last  time,  and  as  ye  have  heard  that  antichrist shall  come,  even  now  are  there  many  antichrists  come  already. Whereby we know that it is the last time (1John 2:18).  

These false apostles are deceitful workers, and fashion themselves like the apostles of Christ. And no marvel, for Satan himself is changed into the  fashion  of  an  angel  of  light.  Therefore  it  is  no  great  thing  if  his 
ministers  fashion  themselves  as  though  they  were  the  ministers  of righteousness (2 Corinthians 11:13-15). 

 What Does Antichrist Withhold? How? 

The  questions  that  arise  in  response  to  Tyndale’s  translation  are  now  evidently answered. His translation again: 

3Let no man deceive you by any means, for the Lord comes not, unless there  come  a  departing  first,  and  that  sinful  man  be  revealed…6And now  you  know  what  withholds,  that  he  might  be  revealed  at  his  time. 7For the mystery of that iniquity does he already work, which only locks until it be taken out of the way.  

(1) What is withheld or locked up? There can only be one answer, for there could only be one thing worthy of Antichrist’s virulent attention: the word of God. For it is only by the true word that men are saved, rescued from captivity to Satan, and given  eternal  life.  Only  by  the  true  word  may  we  know God  through  Christ  and  worship  in  spirit  and  in  truth. Nothing  is  as  important  as  this,  for  God’s  word  is  Spirit 
and it is life (Deut 32:47). Tyndale’s great lament, as we have seen, was that God’s word was so badly locked up by  the  dominant  Church  that  the  people  were  denied salvation:  the  Church  was  apostate  and  sinful,  was murderously  opposed  to  reformation,  and  was  teaching salvation  by  false  means  such  as  fasting,  penance,  and the purchase of indulgences. Tyndale wrote: 

The  kingdom  of  heaven,  which  is  the  scripture  and  word  of  God,  may be so locked up, that he which readeth or heareth it cannot understand it:  as  Christ  testifieth  how  the  scribes  and  Pharisees  had  so  shut  it  up (Matthew 23) and taken away the key of knowledge (Luke 11) that the Jews,  who  thought  themselves  within,  were  yet  locked  out,  and  are  to this  day,  so  that  they  cannot  understand  a  sentence  of  the  scripture unto their salvation. 

Antichrist is ever seeking reason and occasion to suppress the word: it must be kept  in  Latin;  it  must  be  interpreted  only  according  to  his  decrees;  it  must  be locked  away  behind  the  Book  of  Mormon  or  the  Watchtower.  It  is  darkened  by occult  doctrine,  as  among  the  Charismatics.  It  is  darkened  by  purpose-driven doctrine. It is denied by a ‘wiser’ morality that would affirm homosexuality, etc. 

Antichrist will also suppress or destroy those things which serve the word and the faith  of  the  word,  such  as  the  sacraments  of  baptism  and  Holy  Communion. These  are  diminished  or  distorted  by  false  teaching,  they  are  ignored  or carelessly  performed,  or  they  are  made  the  objects  of  false  traditions:  in  times past,  some  persons  delayed  baptism  until  near  death  in  order  to  avoid condemnation for later sin, and some insisted on nude immersion.  

In  the  16th  century  the  Roman  Church  had  so  fallen  that  its  tradition  was  to minister the Lord’s Supper only once per year, and then only the bread, keeping the  cup for  the  priests.  The  service  was  glossed  with  superstitious  notions,  and whatever  truth  remained  in  the  liturgy  was  lost  because  it  was  given  in  Latin. Thus  Holy  Communion,  God’s  ordained  means  of  grace whereby  we  receive  of  and  commune  with  the  Living  Word himself,  was  locked  up  and  shut  away.  Nowadays  the 
Jehovah  Witnesses,  like  their  avowed  enemies  the  Roman Catholics before them, will only celebrate the Lord’s Supper once  a  year.  To  such  persons  the  Reformation  martyr Thomas Cranmer wrote:  

“In  the  beginning,  when  men  were  most  godly  and  most fervent  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  then  they  received  the Communion daily. But when the Spirit of God began to be more  cold  in  men’s  hearts  and  they  waxed  more  worldly  than  godly, then  their  desire  was  not  so  hot  to  receive  the  Communion  as  it  was before… But to them that live godly, it is the greatest comfort that in this world  can  be  imagined;  and  the  more  godly  a  man  is,  the  more sweetness  and  spiritual  pleasure  and  desire  he  shall  have  often  to receive it.”18

Antichrist  further  suppresses  Christian  feast  days  –  holidays,  or  “holy  days”  as Tyndale  called  them  –  cunningly  characterizing  them  as  false  traditions,  or,  a thing  very  common  today,  as  pagan.  Thus  ‘Easter’  becomes  an  evil  word,  and Christians  fear  that  they  are  being  unfaithful  to  the  Lord  if  they  celebrate Christmas.  The  Puritans,  Jehovah  Witnesses,  and  even  some  Evangelicals,  do 
greatly err when they anathematize and suppress Christmas as a pagan festival, thereby abetting the suppression of the knowledge of the incarnation of Christ. O what a subtle beast is the serpent! Indeed the subtlest of the beasts in the field.  

Behold:  that  is  false  which  suppresses  the  Gospel, not  that  which  celebrates  it.  Examples  of  false 
traditions  are  the  preaching  and  sale  of  indulgences for  salvation,  or  ministering  Holy  Communion  once per year – not celebrating the birth of Christ. Further, even  if  Christmas  were  a  problem,  which  it  isn’t,  the  Apostle  Paul  said  that  no matter  how  Christ  was  preached,  he  rejoiced  (Phil  1:18).  But  Antichrist  will  not suffer  us  to  show  forth  or  remember  holy  things,  and  leads  us  astray  with 
objections  which  have  the  appearance  of  piety,  but  serve  only  to  suppress  the faith. Beware objections that do not in reality serve the faith!  

Tyndale's view on sacraments is worthy of consideration. He recognized baptism and the Lord’s Supper as supreme and divinely instituted, by which we, through faith, may receive grace for remission of sin through Jesus Christ our Lord. But he also regarded any “visible sign,” practice, or ceremony that could stir up faith 
as  a  lesser  sacrament  of  sorts,  because  it  “provokes  us  and  helps  our  weak faith”.19  This  would  include  the  observance  of  holy  days,  which  are  visible  and public  signs,  especially  when  meaningfully  celebrated,  and  which  he  obviously treasured  in  the  Church’s  calendar.20  He  recognized  also  marriage,21  fasting,22 and more.23 Anything that puts us in mind of holy things and helps our faith may therefore be called sacramental, provided of course it is not to be understood in the  same  way  as  baptism  and  the  Lord’s  Supper,  nor  given  superstitious “signification”  or  meaning.  Tyndale  further  wrote  that  those  who  suppress  or distort the sacraments are “destroyers”: 

O a merciful God, and a most loving Father, how careth he for us! First, above  all  and  beside  all  his  other  benefits,  to  give  us  his  own  Son Jesus,  and  with  him  to  give  us  himself  and  all;  and  not  content therewith,  but  to  give  us  so  many  sacraments  or  visible  signs,  to provoke us and to help our weak faith, and to keep his mercy in mind: as  baptism,  the  sacrament  of  his  body  and  blood,  and  as  many  other sacraments  as  they  will  have,  if  they  put  significations  to  them  (for  we destroy  none,  but  they  destroy  who  have  put  out  the  significations,  or feigned some [that have no meaning].24

Sacraments  and  holy  days  serve  and  support  the  faith  and  the  word;  therefore they become the targets of Antichrist along with God’s word. 

(2)  Who  or  what  withholds  God’s  word?  Who  “locks”  it?  In  the  earth,  the  only ones  who  could  do  so  are  those  who  have  control  of  it,  those  who  possess  it. Historically  this  has  meant  professing  Churches  of  Judaism  and  Christianity. Thus  Antichrist  works  the  mystery  of  iniquity  through  a  Church  that  wrongly keeps  the  word  from  men  through  persecutions,  by  withholding  the  Gospel,  or through  false  teaching  (as  Tyndale  would  say,  “false  glosses”:  distortion, diminishment, false interpretations, false applications).  

Here  we  see  the  significance  of  the  second  sense  of katĕcho:  Antichrist possesses  and  locks  up;  he  seizes  control  over  the  written  word  and  then withholds it by various means, or he assumes authority as holy teacher and then locks  its  true  sense  away  by  false  teaching.  One  of  the most  insidious forms of withholding  is  to  provide  all  kinds  of  “bible  teaching”,  even  much  talk  about  the Gospel  and  the  need  for  the  Gospel,  but  to  never  actually  give  the  Gospel.  In such congregations the people may hear much that they think to be biblical, but they never hear the message of the great salvation bought for us by the blood of the  Lamb.  And  yet  that  great  preacher,  the  apostle  Paul,  determined  to  know nothing but Jesus Christ and him crucified when he was among the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 2:2).  

(3) Why is Antichrist referred to as ‘he’ or a ‘man’  if Antichrist never will be one particular  individual? Or,  how  can  Antichrist  also  be  many  antichrists  as  related by the apostle John (1 John 2:18)?  Tyndale’s answer, as we saw above, is that Antichrist  is  a  spiritual  thing.  ‘He’  is  a  spiritual  power,  often  personified  in Scriptures.  He  is  opposed  to  Jesus  Christ.  He  works  through  men.  One  of  his major works in the last days, since Jesus rose from the dead and returned to be with  the  Father,  is  to  profess  faith  in  Christ  while  cunningly  destroying  Christ’s witness and testimony. 

Antichrist and the iniquity he works are, of course, of Satan, the father of lies and implacable enemy of God, mankind, and truth. This writer is not a Greek scholar, but  it  is  perhaps  noteworthy  that  the  Greek  word  translated  ‘man’  in  the  ‘sinful man’  of  2  Thessalonians  2:3  is  anthropos,  which  generally  refers  to  the  human face  or  countenance  and  is  used  to  distinguish  man  from  other  species  or orders,25 or the things of man from other things, but not to identify an individual. As Tyndale understood it, spiritual Antichrist ‘has’ a human face and assumes a human  face,  for  he  has  power  and  dominion  over  men,  and  he  works  in  earth through men against Christ to keep or lead all people (if it were  possible) away 
from God’s word. So then, Antichrist is not any single man, although he may be epitomized  in  certain  men  (or  women),  who  at  times  are  referred  to  as  ‘very antichrists.’ Or an unfaithful and apostate person who is the head or highest ruler might  be  referred  to  as  ‘the  Antichrist,’  because  in  him  the  forces  of  darkness wield supreme authority.   

When  Martin  Luther  and William  Tyndale  lived  and  wrote,  Christendom,  though fraught with sects and division, was under a supreme and fierce pontiff who, by his  laws,  deeds,  and  doctrine,  his  indulgences,  dispensations,  inquisitions,  and burnings, was revealed as the Antichrist of that kingdom. The power of any pope to  hurt,  burn,  and  maim  has  been  diminished,  but  it  will  ever  remain  that antichrists may be among us, wielding greater or lesser power as they advance within their own kingdoms, secret traitors to the true faith, in a Christendom that is  now  greatly  divided  along  denominational  lines  and  scattered  around  the globe.  The  apostle  John  warned  almost  20  centuries  before  our  time,  “Little children  it  is  the  last  time,  and  as  ye  have  heard  how  that  Antichrist  shall come, even now are there many antichrists come already. Whereby we know that  it  is  the  last  time  (1Joh  2:18).”  We  live  in  the  last  time  of  which  the beloved apostle spoke, and if we believe him, we know to look out for “many antichrists.”  

(4)  How  is  the  mystery  of  iniquity  taken  out  of  the  way?  It  is  ultimately  by restoring truth that the mystery of iniquity is taken out of the way and Antichrist’s grip is broken, at least for the time being. This happened when the Lord came in the  flesh  in  the  1st  century.  By  then  the  departing  had  come,  the  apostasy  of verse 3: 

Let no man deceive you by any means, for the Lord comes not, unless there come a departing first, and that sinful man be revealed, the son of perdition  which  is  an  adversary,  and  is  exalted  above  all  that  is  called God, or that is worshipped: so that he shall sit as God in the temple of God, and show himself as God. 

When the scribes, Pharisees, and Sadducees reigned in Jerusalem at Christ’s first coming, the Scriptures had been locked up, or “shut up”, by the teaching of those blind guides:  

M’t  23:13:  Woe  be  unto  you  scribes  and  Pharisees,  hypocrites,  for  ye shut  up  the  kingdom  of  heaven  before  men:  ye  yourselves  go  not  in, neither suffer ye them that come, to enter in. 

M’t  23:16-19:  Woe  be  unto  you  blind  guides,  which  say  whosoever swear by the temple, it is nothing: but whosoever swear by the gold of the temple, he offendeth. Ye fools and blind: which is greater, the gold 
or the temple that sanctifieth the gold? And whosoever sweareth by the altar, it is nothing: but whosoever sweareth by the offering that lieth on the altar, offendeth. Ye fools and blind: which is greater, the offering or 
the altar which sanctifieth the offering? 

Jesus  taught  his  apostles  great  truths,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  opened  great mysteries  to  them.  Then  they  taught  others  by  preaching  and  by  pen  –  despite the roaring of Antichrist against them. Through their faithful teaching the iniquity worked by false prophets in Judaism was taken out of the way for a time.  

But the time of the pure and true faith was to pass, and apostolic teaching was progressively  shut  up  by  the  Roman  Church  as  the  centuries  progressed,  until the  full  departure,  or  apostasy,  of  Tyndale’s  era  manifestly  revealed  Antichrist. Then  Antichrist’s  withholding  was  taken  out  of  the  way  once  more  in  the Reformation  of  the  16th  century,  during  more  times  of  roaring  and  intense struggle,  when  God  through  men  like  Martin  Luther,  William  Tyndale,  and Thomas  Cranmer  (to  mention  only  a  few  of  many)  restored  truth  and  brought much  light  to  bear  again  upon  the  Scriptures  and  the  sacraments.  But  then  the process  of  locking  up  began  again.  The  light  has  been  darkened,  often  gravely so,  in  a  great  many  places,  including  in  so-called  evangelical  and  Protestant Churches,  let  alone  among  such  groups  as  the  Mormons,  Christadelphians, Christian Scientists, Jehovah Witnesses, and so on. 

Therefore Tyndale taught that the restoration of truth is the “coming of the Lord” referred  to  in  verse  2:3.  He  comes  in  truth  to  and  for  those  who  love  truth.  He comes notably  when apostasy is at its worst. Apostasy displays the man of sin, Antichrist,  for  those  who  have  eyes  to  see.  Then  comes  the  Lord  through  his prophets and faithful servants. This cycle has been repeated in world history, and we might expect it to end only with the Lord’s final and most glorious coming. 

In my view, the withholding power of the man of sin may also be considered to be at  least  partly  taken  out  of  the  way  when  his  power  and  authority  to  persecute and suppress the saints is diminished. 

A few final notes before leaving this section:  

(1)  A  perhaps  unintended  difference  between  the  KJV  and  Tyndale  is  at  verse 2:4.  Speaking  of  Antichrist,  Tyndale  put  that  he  will  sit  as  God  in  the  temple  of God, and show himself as God. This is logical, saying that Antichrist would make a display of himself as if he were God. Obviously he would be showing himself to others. But the KJV says (due to archaic or ungrammatical syntax or punctuation 
perhaps?)  that  Antichrist  shows  himself  to  himself:  “showing  himself  that  he  is God.”  This  rendering  might  put  us  off  guard:  if  Antichrist’s  posturing  is  inward only, why would we be concerned about the outward?  

(2)  Consider  verse  2:3,  where  both  Tyndale  and  the  KJV  committee  supplied words that were missing in the Greek. Tyndale:  the  Lord  comes  not,  unless  there  come  a  departing  first,  and  that 
sinful man be revealed… 

With  “the  Lord  comes  not”,  Tyndale  used  what  grammarians  call  a  “timeless present tense”. It points us neither to the future nor to the past, but simply makes a statement about when it is that the Lord comes, and thereby allows for one or more comings. This enables the understanding of the historical cycle of apostasy that we see in the Scriptures – the coming of the Lord in truth whenever apostasy is full blown. It also allows for the final coming.  

However the King James Version is worded such that it points to the future, to a day that is yet to come: that  day  shall  not  come,  unless  there  come  a  falling  away  first,  and that man of sin be revealed… 

‘That’ in the KJV verse is a demonstrative adjective pointing out a particular day for  consideration,  and  ‘shall’  is  generally  understood  in  the  future  tense,  thus looking  to  a  future  day  of  apostasy  and  setting  up  the  expectation  of  a  future Antichrist. 

In conclusion, I submit that Tyndale’s 1534 rendition of the man of sin passages in 2 Thessalonians 2 is logical, clear, internally consistent, and realistic. It admits of no ambiguity. It makes preeminent sense given the primacy of place that the Scriptures  claim  for  themselves  in  true  faith.  It  makes  sense  given  what  was historically  evident  in  the  Church  when  Tyndale  wrote.  And  it  makes  sense considering  what  the  Scriptures  teach  about  the  course  of  God’s  word  in  the hands of men, who will ever apostatize.  

Tyndale understood where we must spy out Antichrist: he was slain by a Church that called itself ‘holy’. But what a hard teaching it is, the mystery of iniquity that may be worked by Antichrist through a professing Christian Church. True, most of  us  in  the  West  no  longer  suffer  the  vicious  inquisitions  and  tribulations  that Tyndale and so many others did. But seasons of relative peace ought not to blind 
us  to  the  warnings  and  proofs  of  history  and  of  the  Scriptures.  The  beast  does not always show himself a wolf, but may speak like a lamb. We must watch and awake as the Scriptures do exhort us, so that we may remain among the faithful.       


The Articles Above are extracted from the eBook entitled Tyndale’s Doctrine of Antichrist And His Translation of 2 Thessalonians 2 By R. M. Davis. You can Download and Read the whole book by Clicking HERE in PDF FORMAT or you can visit NewMatthewBible.org for more articles.

The Prophecies of Martin Luther

THIS IS A REPOST FROM BEGGARS ALL BLOGGERS SITE. POSTED ON FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2006 by  JAMES SWAN AT 6:38 AM.

Recently I posted a link to a rare Luther book: Martin Luther’s Letters by Margaret A. Currie (London, 1908). I pointed out that the website hosting the link seems a bit wacky. If you explore the site use some caution and discretion.

One of the other documents they host drew my interest:

Several choice prophecyes of the incomparable and famous Dr. Martin Luther, as also, The remarkable prophecy of the learned and reverend Dr. Musculus

The website hosting this link refers to it as one of Luther’s writings. It is not. It is the work of one of Luther’s students: Andreas Musculus (1514-1581). Musculus’ writing is interesting, as it represents a trend which occurred as the result of Luther’s impact during the 16th-17th Centuries. Musculus viewed Luther as a genuine prophet sent from God. In examining Malachi 4:5 and the return of Elijah before the “last day”, Musculus reasoned that Luther, like John the Baptist, was the returned Elijah, signaling the end of the world. The link above is an example of 16th Century apocalyptic literature. Musculus was certain the end was near.

The link above is about 32 pages and is an interesting read.Much of the information is biographical, presenting a recounting of Luther’s life. Also one finds an emphasis on the Turks and the papacy. For instance:

"Antichrist must fall, and it plainly and clearly appeareth, saith Luther, that the Pope is true Antichrist; those that transgresse his Decrees and Statutes, are farr more feverely and diligently punished, then those who offend the Laws and the word of God: In such a sort doth the Pope exalt himself over, and above God, and he is therefore most properly called Antichrist, in regard that he fitteth in the Temple, and in the Church of God, and boasteth himself above all that is called God. The Turk is not this Antichrist, saith Luther, for he fitteth not in Gods Church; he is but the Battle-Axe of God, whereby he executeth is Vengeance upon the Nations, he is a wicked Beast; out of Gods Church, there is not Antichrist; now the Pope fitteth in the Holy Church, and taketh unto him that Honour and Worship which is due unto God onely, therefore the Pope must be the true Antichrist. It is but a cold, and an idle dream of the Papists, that Antichrist should be a single, and unattended person that should govern in a wilde way by suborning, and scattering of moneys in the streets, and that he should do Miracles, and carry about him a fiery Oven, and that he should destroy the Saints, Eliah, and Enoch. There are too many (said Luther) who complain and think, I am too fierce and too violent against the Pope, when alas I conceive my self to be too milde; I do with that I could breath out thunder-bolts against the Pope and Popery, and that every word were a clap of thunder."

For Luther it was also the end of the world in the 16th Century. The entirety of his Reformation career embraced an impending consummation of history. Mark Edwards points out:

“In general Luther viewed the history of his own time as the realization of the apocalyptic predictions of Daniel and Revelation. The events of his age, he was convinced, were certain signs that the End Time was at hand. The 1530 foreword to his translation of Daniel makes clear how firmly set this conviction was. Following traditional exegesis, Luther identified Daniels ‘kingdom of iron’ with the Roman Empire, which, through its transference to the Germans, had survived into Luther’s own time and would persist until the last day. The papacy was the antichrist alluded to in the eleventh chapter of Daniel, and the Turk was the small horn that replaced three horns of the beast in the seventh chapter. The appearance of the papal antichrist and the success of the Turk left no doubt in Luther’s mind that the apocalyptic drama was in its final act” [Source: Mark U Edwards, Luther’s Last Battles (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1983), 97].

Those of you who know me, know that I do not argue against Rome by using prophecy or identifying the Pope and papacy as the anti-Christ. I do though find this type of historical information very helpful in trying to get a sense for the "mood" of the 16th Century.

Musculus actually went further with his respect and admiration for Martin Luther than many of his contemporaries. For Musculus, Luther’s writings were from God’s special servant: God’s prophet. Luther’s words were thus that vehicle by which to interpret Scripture by. In a 1573 work by Musculus, he noted he daily meditated on the Bible joined with a careful study of Luther’s writings. While ultimate authority was found in the Bible, interpretation of the Scripture was to be guided by Luther’s writings.

IS POPERY THE ANTICHRIST?

THE TENDENCY OF PROPHECY TO DESCRIBE THINGS ACCORDING TO THE REALITY, RATHER THAN THE APPEARANCE OR PROFESSION

The interpretation which has been given in the text of the strongest terms in the apostle's language respecting the antichrist, by understanding them of a virtual, in contradistinction to a formal and avowed assumption of blasphemous prerogatives, is so much in accordance with the general style of prophecy, and so plainly demanded by the connection, that we cannot refrain from expressing our wonder, at finding interpreters of note still pressing the opposite view. Their doing so must be regarded as another instance of that tendency to literalism, which has wrought such confusion in the prophetical field, and which, at particular points, returns upon some, who in general have attained to a correct discernment of the characteristics of prophecy. The practice of describing things by their real, as opposed to their professed or apparent character, is one that peculiarly distinguishes the Apocalyptic imagery. Thus the worldly kingdoms, both in Daniel and the Revelation, are represented as beasts-not that they actually were, or gave themselves out to be such, but because they pursued a course which partook largely of the bestial nature; they were, one might say, virtual beasts. And the false, seductive power designated Babylon, the mother of harlots an d abominations, we may be sure, was not going to proclaim her own shame by declaring herself to be what those epithets import. Beyond all doubt, she is described according to what she really was, not by what she would profess, to be. In like manner, th e names of blasphemy on the head of the beast indicate a real rather than a professed dishonour to the God of heaven; for open profanity and avowed atheism have, with few exceptions, been studiously avoided by the worldly power. It has almost uniformly striven to associate with its different forms of government, and political aims, the name and sanctions of religion. Even in the more prosaic parts of the Apocalypse we find the same characteristic prevailing-as when it describes the soaring spirit of the Gnostic teachers, by their knowing the depths of Satan (not those of God, which they themselves rather affected to understand), and designates them by such epithets as Nicolaitans (people-destroyers), followers of Balaam, Jezebels-which they were so far from professing to be, that they laid claim to the highest gifts and the most honourable distinctions. Nor could it be otherwise with the wolves, of whose coming St Paul warned the Ephesian elders (Acts xx.); they were not going, when they appeared, to avow their own wolf-like character, but would, doubtless, aspire to the place of guides and shepherds of the flock. All prophecy, indeed, abounds with examples of this mode of representation; for, speaking as with Divine intuition, it ever delights to penetrate through showy appearances, and to strip deceivers of their false disguises. Thus the self-deifying pride of the Chaldean conquerors has its representation in the prophet Habakkuk, by their being characterised as successful fishers, sacrificing to their own net (chap. i. 16); and the corruption of degenerate Israel is exhibited with singular boldness by Ezekiel, under the form of their having had an Amorite father and a Hittite mother (chap. xvi. 3); and by Isaiah, under the announcement, as from themselves, that they had made a covenant with death, and come to an agreement with hell (chap. xxviii. 15). By a still bolder figure the prophet Amos calls the tabernacle in the wilderness the tabernacle of their Moloch, because the idolatrous and unsanctified spirit which still clung to them rendered it practically an idol-tent rather than that of the true God (chap. v. 26). These and many similar representations are obviously designed to set before us the real state and character of the parties described, though entirely different from the outward profession and appearance. On any other principle it were impossible to render much that is written in prophecy either intelligible in itself, or consistent with the facts of history.

The violation of this principle in regard to the passages which treat of the antichristian apostacy, by adhering to a mistaken literalism, is the more to be regretted, as it is doing with this portion of the prophetic Scriptures what it has already d one with those which have respect to the promised Messiah-it is altogether destroying in the hands of its abettors their apologetic value. As, with the one class of predictions, Jewish Rabbis find themselves backed by Christian literalists in denying the fulfilment of some of the clearest prophetic intimations in the history of Jesus of Nazareth, so Romish controversialists are sheltering themselves under the wing of Protestant interpreters of the same school, in rebutting the application of the Scriptural antichrist to Popery. Thus, in a small volume recently published on "The End of the World, or the Second Coming of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, by the Very Rev. John Baptist Pagani," a very adroit use is made of the name of the late Mr Faber. A n astonishment is first expressed that any intelligent person could ever have thought of identifying the Pope of Rome with the antichrist of Scripture, especially that this could be done in so enlightened a country as England; and then a passage from Mr Faber's "Calendar of Prophecy" is quoted to show how a sensible Protestant writer exposes the absurdity of the idea. In the passage referred to the argument is thrown into what is considered both by Mr Faber and by his Catholic admirer a conclusive syllog ism. "I shall throw my argument," Mr Faber says, "into the form of a syllogism, and if any person be able to confute me, I shall be very ready to own myself mistaken. According to St John, he who denies the Father and the Son, this is the antichrist. T he line of the Roman Pontiffs did not deny the Father or the Son; therefore the line of the Roman Pontiffs is not the antichrist." Embracing with satisfaction this triumphant syllogism, Mr Pagani proceeds to give it additional strength by affirming, that so far from denying the Father and the Son, the Roman Pontiffs have always maintained the doctrine of the Trinity against Deists, Sabellians, Unitarians, and other herectics; that they have uniformly held, that Christ has come in the flesh; that they hav e also been remarkably distinguished for their humility, taking for their ordinary title, "unworthy ministers of Christ," "servants of the servants of God," whereas antichrist is to exalt himself above all that is called God. P. 41, sq.

One might go through a considerable portion of prophecy with this sort of syllogism, and ask in vain for any thing in the transactions of real life, that would answer to the terms of the predictions. What, on such a style of interpretation, could b e made of the passages to which we have been adverting? Must we suspend the veracity of one prophet on the question, whether the proud Chaldeans actually hung up a net in some temple and did sacrifice to it? Or that of another, on the similar question, whether the Israelites literally bore about during their long sojourn in the wilderness an idolatrous tabernacle in impious rivalry to that of Jehovah?1 Or must we have credible testimony to the fact, that the great worldly monarchies, as they successively arose, did each proclaim their own beast-like and blasphemous character? Or, finally, shall we hold that nothing can verify the description given of the mystic Babylon, which does not set itself openly to establish and avow the prostitution of all r ighteous principle? If such be the kind of expectations, with which we proceed to examine the prophetic word, we may certainly lay our account to meet with few instances of fulfilment; we know not where they are to be found in the past, and are afraid th ey shall in vain be looked for in the future. But surely, if the apostle in his day knew persons in the Christian church, whom he could declare to be the "enemies of the Cross of Christ," even while they were avowedly looking to that cross for salvation, the pontiffs of Rome might justly enough be characterized as denying the Father and the Son, if they should be found claiming prerogatives, and upholding a system of error and delusion, which virtually subvert the revelation given of the Father and the S on in Scripture. Let it just be granted, that in the descriptions of the collective antichrist, the apostles had their eye on the realities, not on the mere appearances of things--no very extravagant postulate surely--then the proper syllogism will stand thus: the antichrist, according to St. John, is he who denies the Father and the Son; but the line of the Roman Pontiffs, by their own blasphemous assumptions, and by their system of legalized falsehood and corruption, utterly opposed to the spirit and design of the Gospel, have denied what is revealed of the Father and the Son; therefore the line of the Roman pontiffs is antichrist. This we take to be a truer form of syllogism than Mr. Faber's. But it only meets one fallacy involved in the interpretation. There is another in its taking for granted, that the representations in John's epistles are to be regarded as comprehensive of all that was to characterize the spirit and conduct of the antichrist. He merely points to one of the first forms and manifestations of the evil-that which took shape under the hands of the Gnostic teachers. By and by this was to lead on to others, of which not less distinct intimation was given elsewhere in the New Testament writings. The anti christian spirit was to assume different phases, according to the peculiar influences of the time, and the changing fortunes of the church. But they were all to have one thing in common: under a profession of Christianity, there was to be something in doctrine or practice, which i n effect made void the Christian truth and life. This in every form was to be the characteristic of antichristianism as contradistinguished from atheism, heathenism, or undisguised worldliness. And hence, so far from expecting that the Popes, or any other embodiments of the antichrist, should formally assume what is predicted of this power, we should rather expect the reverse. We should expect a studious effort to disguise the truth of the case, though such a one as should only impose upon the ignorant or the corrupt. And precisely as the Servant of servants can in lordly arrogance place his foot upon the necks of princes, and claim the ascendency over all earthly power and authority, so under a boastful proclamation of the doctrine of the Trinity, an d the conversion of the Cross into a magic charm, may there by found the most substantial denial of the Father and the Son. In a word, the question is, not what Popery pretends to be, but what it really is; with this alone we have to do in determining its relation to the prophetic delineations of Scripture. And when the subject is viewed in this light, he must be strangely blinded or unhappily biassed, who fails to perceive the striking correspondence between the one and the other.

___________________________________

1. Even Hengstenberg has given too much countenance to this utterly groundless and extravagant idea, when, in discoursing upon this passage of Amos in the first volume of his work on the Pentateuch, he thus unfolds the general sense of the announcement: "T he great mass of the people had, for the larger part of the time during their march through the wilderness, given up honouring the Lord by sacrifices, and instead of Jehovah, the God of hosts, had set up a spurious king of heaven (the Egyptian Pan), whom with the rest of the host of heaven, they honoured with a spurious worship." It is against all probability, that such an openly idolatrous worship, as is here supposed, should have been practised by the mass of the Israelites during their stay in the wilderness. Occasional defections there no doubt were, but we have no reason to think more-at least, nothing approaching to such a regular, systematic, and general idolatry. We are told even of the comparatively smaller and isolated offences of a public nature-such as the gathering of sticks on the Sabbath, and the blaspheming of God's name-being capitally punished; and can it be imagined that an idol-tabernacle should have been allowed to be carried about, and openly frequented? Assuredly not. It is of the state of the heart, of its still unsanctified and idolatrous spirit, that the prophet speaks; this practically turned Jehovah's tent and worship into the interest of heathenism; in God's sight it belonged to Moloch rather than to himself. When thus viewed, also there is no need, with Hengstenberg, of rendering "your king" instead of "your Moloch;" indeed, to do so rather obscures the meaning. The prophet is seeking to identify the idolatrous spirit of his own day with that of earlier times; they w ere then going after Moloch; and so, says the prophet, you have always been substantially doing. You did so through your forefathers in the wilderness; even then you bore the tabernacle of your Moloch, and sacrificed to strange gods, and the old doom mu st return upon you. It is, therefore, the later form of idolatry, which is used to characterize the earlier, not (as Hengstenberg would have it) the earlier the later.

The preceding article was excerpted from Appendix "L," Page 367, of Patrick Fairbairn's The Interpretation of Prophecy, 1864 (Recently reprinted by Banner of Truth Publishing)

SOURCE: SWRB.com

ANTICHRIST AN ENEMY UNDER A MASK.

Antichrist an enemy under a mask.  ( CHAPTER III of the Book The Papacy Is The Antichrist By Rev. J. A. WYLIE, LL.D. )

In order to introduce ourselves to our subject, we have taken it for granted that the system described by Paul in the passage we have just quoted is the papacy.  This is the thing to be established.  We now proceed to prove this, and provided we shall show on good and conclusive grounds that the system depicted by Paul is the Roman apostacy, and that this is the same system which Daniel and John have portrayed under symbolic imagery, it will follow that one who admits the Bible to be the Word of God, and that Paul wrote by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, must believe that the Papacy –that is, the Roman apostacy –is the Antichrist of Scripture.

This is not point of mere speculation.  It is a question that has attendant upon it great practical issues.  This inquiry has for its object the ascertainment of the true meaning of an important part of the Word of God, even the better half of its prophecies.  Moreover, on this question must rest the verdict we are to pronounce on that society which calls itself “the church,” as also the revelations in which we are to stand to it.  And on it, too, must depend whether we shall abandon or whether we shall continue to occupy the ground which we have been accustomed to regard as our divine central position in our war with Popery; or, rather, whether we ought not to end this war, and confess that we have been fighting all along under a mistake.

Who is Antichrist?  It will help us to the right answer to this question if we shall first determine, What is Antichrist?  Antichrist is an enemy who makes war with the Son of God.  Of that there is no doubt.  But what is the form of this war, and under what character does Antichrist carry it on?  Does he wage it openly, or does he fight it under a mask? Does he take the field as an open rebel and a declared foe, or does he come as a friendly adherent who professes to bring support and help to the cause which, in reality, he seeks to undermine and destroy?  To determine this point, let us look at the meaning of the word Antichrist as employed in Scripture.

The reader sees that the term is a composite one, being made up of two words anti and Christ.  The name is one of new formation; being compounded, it would seem, for this very enemy, and by its etymology expressing more exactly and perfectly his character than any older word could.  The precise question now before us is this –What is the precise sense of anti in this connection?  Does it designate an enemy who says openly and truly, “I am against Christ.”  Or does it designate one who says plausibly, yet falsely, “I am for Christ.”  Which?  To determine this, let us look at the force given to this prefix by writers in both classic literature and Holy Scripture.  First, the old classic writers.  By these the preposition anti is often employed to designate a substitute.  This is, in fact, a very common use of it in the classic writers.  For instance, anti-basileus, he who is the locum tenens of a king, or as we now should say viceroy: anti having in this case the force of the English term vice. He who filled the place of consul was antihupatos, pro-counsul. He who took the place of an absent guest at a feast was styled antideipnos.  The preposition is used in this sense of the great Substitute Himself.  Christ is said to have given Himself as an antilutron, a ransom in the stead of all. Classic usage does not require us to give only one sense to this word, and restrict it to one who seeks openly, and by force, to seat himself in the place of another, and by violent usurpation bring that other’s authority to an end.  We are at liberty to apply it to one who steals into the office of another under the mask of friendship; and while professing to uphold his interest, labours to destroy them.  This leaves us free to turn to the use of the word in Scripture. The Antichrist comes first into view in our Lord’s discourse recorded in
Matt.xxiv. 24, and Mark xiii. 22.  “For false Christs (pseudoxristos) and false prophets shall arise, and shall show signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect.’  Our Lord does not, indeed, use the word Antichrist, but what is almost its synonym pseudo-Christ.  Nevertheless, the persons whose coming He foretells are in the line of Antichrist; they belong to the same family, and their grand characteristic is deception.  Manifestly, they are not open enemies, but pretended friends; they are “false Christs and false prophets,” and as such are forerunners of that great Antichrist who is to succeed them, and in whom they are to find their fuller development and final  consummation.  They shall seek by “signs and wonders,” false, of course, to obscure the glory of Christ’s true miracles, to weaken the evidence of His Messiahship arising there from, and to draw men away from Him, and after themselves.

The other place in the New Testament in which reference is made to Antichrist is the 1st and 2nd Epistles of John.  The idea which John presents of the Antichrist is quite in harmony with that of our Lord.  John looks for him in the guise of a Deceiver.  “Little children,” says John (1st Epistle ii. 18),  “it is the last time: and as ye have heard that Antichrist shall come, even now are there many Antichrists.”  After this announcement of
a special and great Antichrist, to follow in the wake of those minor Antichrists that were already arrived, and were urging their claims on the attention of the world, he comes to look more closely at the giant who was to stand up after these dwarfs had passed away.  He notes prominently one characteristic of him, and it is his falsehood. Antichrist, says John, is to be a liar (verse 22).  “Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is Antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.” “St John’s words,” says Archbishop Trench, “seem to me decisive on the matter, that resistance to, and defiance of, Christ, not the false assumption if his character and offices, is the essential mark of Antichrist.” (Synonyms of the New Testament, by R.C. Trench, B.D., p.120  Cambridge and London, 1854) Such is Dr Trench’s opinion; but he gives no grounds for it, and we are unable to imagine any.  We draw the exactly opposite conclusion from the apostle’s words, even that the “false assumption of His character and offices” is an essential mark of Antichrist.  “He is a liar,” says John.  But if he comes boldly and truthfully avowing himself the enemy of Christ, how is he a liar?  If he avows, without concealment, his impious design of overthrowing Christ, with what truth can he be spoken of as a deceiver?  But such is the character plainly ascribed to him by John (2nd epistle, verse 7): -“For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.  This is a deceiver and an Antichrist.”  Plainly the exegesis, or rather supposition, of Dr Trench is inadmissible. Dr Chalmers had no difficulty in seeing the Roman system in the “apostacy” predicted by Paul.  We find him saying in his Scripture Readings: -“Save us, O Lord, from falling away, lest we share in the perdition that waiteth on the great apostacy.  We  hold the usurpation of Rome to be evidently pointed at, and therefore let us maintain our distance, and keep up our resolute protest against its great abominations.” (Dr Chalmers’
Sabbath Scripture Readings, vol. I., p.310. Edinburgh, 1848.)

Archbishop Trench was misled, it may be, by the strength of the term deny. “He is Antichrist that denieth the Father and the Son.”  But he who does not confess when he is called to do so, denies.  Such is the use of the word in these applications all through the New Testament.  Such is the use John makes of it in this very passage: -“for many deceivers are entered into the world who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the
flesh.”  It is clear that Antichrist, as depicted by our Lord and by His Apostle John, is to wear a mask, and to profess one thing and act another.  He is to enter the church as Judas entered the garden –professedly to kiss his Master, but in reality to betray Him.  He is to come with words of peace in his mouth but war in his heart.  He is to be a counterfeit Christ –Christ’s likeness stamped on base metal.  He is to be an imitation of Christ, -a close, clever, and astute imitation, which will deceive the world for ages, those only excepted who, taught by the Holy Spirit, shall be able to see through the disguise and detect the enemy under the mask of the friend.

Extracted from the Book entitled The Papacy Is The Antichrist By Rev. J. A. WYLIE, LL.D. AUTHOR OF “HISTORY OF PROTESTANTISM,” “HISTORY OF THE SCOTISH NATION,” ETC. You can DOWNLOAD and READ the eBOOK Here for FREE in DOC format or PDF Format HERE.