Saving the Nations by Casting Out the Prince of This World

The first printed map to show the world as a sphere from 1515 was a collaboration between Albrecht Dürer and Johann Stabius

In a previous blog post, I answered some queries from a brother about amillennialism. I was disappointed in that the brother claimed that it was arbitrary and/or inconsistent for me to interpret the vision of Revelation 20 figuratively. Here I answer this claim and support my interpretation by comparison with Scripture itself.

I had already answered his question about the correct way to interpret Scripture. We ought to interpret Scripture in the way it intends for us to interpret it. History must be interpreted as history. Didactic teaching in letters must be interpreted as such. Parables must be interpreted as parables. Prophetic visions must be interpreted as prophetic visions. Prophetic dreams must be interpreted as prophetic dreams.

Scripture itself does this and teaches us the appropriate context. As an example, Daniel records history, and in that history Nebuchadnezzar is given a dream containing a vision of earthly kingdoms and the kingdom of Christ. Even Nebuchadnezzar understood that this had to be interpreted, that the parts of the statue were intended to represent something figuratively. And Daniel, by the Spirit gives the authoritative interpretation.

Revelation contains a series of prophetic visions given to John, some of which concerned the present (e.g. the seven churches), some pertaining to the recent past (e.g. the ascension and session of Christ), some pertaining to entire New Testament age up to and especially including the end of the world. John is also given visions of the eternal state. The exact phrase "I saw" occurs 35 times in Revelation, which phrase in this context indicates a prophetic vision, and John even refers to that which he saw as being a "vision" (Rev. 9:17). The book opens by specifically telling us that the things contained in it which John "saw" were things that were sent and "signified" (Rev. 1:1). The interpretation of these visions is not by a wild allegorical method according to the imagination of the reader or the speculations of Origen, but by a sober and objective interpretation of Scripture with Scripture. The visions deliberately draw upon ideas explained and taught elsewhere in Scripture.

It is nothing less than disobedience and rebellion against the Scriptures to therefore presume that these visions are intended to represent literal things. Besides which, it would be extreme absurdity. The absurdities and even heresies would be too many to enumerate. Until a man submits himself to the way Scripture chooses to interpret itself, he will make very little progress and profit very little from instruction or discussion with others.

The "thousand years" in the context of the text, in my opinion, fits best with the idea of the church throughout all her generations (cf. Deut. 7:9). The general idea of "thousand" is simply "very many" or even "all" (cf. Ps. 50:10). But whatever reasoning or explanation is given here, there is no doubt that the beginning of this period is the cross of Christ, and the end is the resurrection at the final judgement. It is also clear that this heavenly reign then continues into eternity.

The binding of Satan is specific here, that he can no longer deceive the nations, and more specifically, so he cannot yet bring them all together against the church, that is, as the beastly antichristian kingdom just described in previous visions, building upon what was revealed to Daniel. Furthermore, when Christ came, that is exactly what He did. He "cast" out (or "bound") devils, to show that the kingdom of God was at hand.

When Christ went up to Jerusalem, some Greeks sought after Him, which was a token that His time had come. His response upon hearing this was: "The hour is come, that the Son of man should be glorified" (John 12:23). He explained that this would be by His death on the cross, and that this casting out of Satan, would mean the salvation of the nations:

Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out. And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. This he said, signifying what death he should die (John 12:31-33).

In the Old Testament, the nations were left to themselves (Acts 14:16; 17:30), but the death and resurrection of Christ has brought salvation to the whole world. more than anything else, that is what has characterized the New Testament era, the redemption and gathering of people from every tongue, tribe, and nation under heaven.

A dispensational may call this subjective interpretation and presuppositional bias, but in fact, it arises from Scripture itself. We come to Revelation, written last of all, when John was already old, already with the groundwork of the whole rest of Scripture laid, and we interpret it in that light, and then it makes sense, and it fits within what we have already learned, and then it fills out and informs us more, and edifies and instructs us.

In my previous post, I never suggested a literal throne of David. Christ's throne (or reign) is from heaven and all authority in heaven and earth falls under His rule. David's literal throne was literally a chair in Jerusalem, and figuratively represented his literal reign over a literal small nation in Palestine. Those were types and shadows of better things, as Hebrews (and the rest of Scripture) explains to us. The angel, quoted in Luke's gospel, tells us that Jesus is the promised Son of David, the one who inherits a kingdom far greater than what David ruled over, yet it is called David's throne, because that was a picture and a shadow of what was to come.

Everywhere Scripture teaches us that Christ and His kingdom and His priesthood and His sacrifice and His church is the fulfillment of the types and shadows and promises of the Old Testament. This is not "Replacement theology." This is Fulfillment Theology, also known as New Testament theology, or Biblical theology.

The Star Falling, the Dragon Cast Out, and Satan Bound

In my last blog post, I answered a brother who asked questions about amillennialism. Since his response was considerably less than positive, I took the opportunity to expand upon my original answer and answer some additional points or queries he raised which I now share in this post, and in (DV) some subsequent posts.

I previously related John 12:31 to Rev. 20:3, concerning in the casting out or down of Satan, and referred in general terms to the casting out of devils in the gospels as a sign of the kingdom of God being near and breaking forth. I neglected to mention Luke 10:18 which speaks of a fall of Satan from heaven during the ministry of Christ (in the sending out of the seventy):

And the seventy returned again with joy, saying, Lord, even the devils are subject unto us through thy name. And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven. Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you. Notwithstanding in this rejoice not, that the spirits are subject unto you; but rather rejoice, because your names are written in heaven (Luke 10:17-20).

This directly relates to Revelation 9 which speaks of a star falling (peto; same verb) from heaven:

And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit. And he opened the bottomless pit; and there arose a smoke out of the pit, as the smoke of a great furnace; and the sun and the air were darkened by reason of the smoke of the pit. And there came out of the smoke locusts upon the earth: and unto them was given power, as the scorpions of the earth have power. And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads. And to them it was given that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months: and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man. And in those days shall men seek death, and shall not find it; and shall desire to die, and death shall flee from them. And the shapes of the locusts were like unto horses prepared unto battle; and on their heads were as it were crowns like gold, and their faces were as the faces of men. And they had hair as the hair of women, and their teeth were as the teeth of lions. And they had breastplates, as it were breastplates of iron; and the sound of their wings was as the sound of chariots of many horses running to battle. And they had tails like unto scorpions, and there were stings in their tails: and their power was to hurt men five months. And they had a king over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon, but in the Greek tongue hath his name Apollyon (Rev 9:1-11).

The devil is called a star here like in Isaiah 14, where he is pictured by the king of Babylon and called Lucifer or morning/day star (Isa. 14:12). To him (i.e. to this personified star) was given the key of the bottomless pit, so that he can release upon the earth hordes of scorpion-like locusts from its smoke to torment people (Rev. 9:1-11). Our passage in Luke describes the power of the enemy as being like that of scorpions or serpents with the power to hurt. The later part of the same chapter, though another vision, speaks similarly of a demonic army, like lions or serpents (i.e. like the devil; I Pet. 5:8), with the same character of the smoky, fiery, hellish pit, and which hurt or kill the impenitent (Rev. 9:16-21).

Significantly, both in Luke 10 and in Revelation 9, these demonic spirits are unable to hurt or kill God's people (Luke 10:19; Rev. 9:4). In this important sense, these  terrible lion-like armies of locust-scorpions or horsemen-serpents with human-like intelligence and feminine allurements are bound. With regard to the timing of this vision, considering its connection to Luke 10 is that describes the activity of Satan and his host in the New Testament age (Rev. 1:19).

Revelation 12 also speaks of the casting out of a great dragon, specifically after the birth of Christ:

And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night. And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death. Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time (Rev 12:9-12).

First of all, the dragon in the vision is positively identified as representing the devil, or Satan. Secondly, the timing of this casting out of Satan occurs at the birth and ascension of Christ (Rev. 12:5), and is associated with the coming of the kingdom of God (Rev. 12:10). The result of the casting down of Satan is woe for the inhabitants of the earth, as we just saw in the vision of Revelation 9 (Rev. 12:12). This vision builds upon this further by illustrating that this casting down of Satan also means persecution for the church, but in such a way that the church is miraculously preserved despite all Satan's opposition (Rev. 12:13-17; cf. Matt. 16:18; John 16:33). In this way too, though Satan's casting down means persecution for the church, Satan is nevertheless bound. Incidentally, the Old Testament church pictured by the woman which gives birth to Christ, is the same woman here pictured as the persecuted New Testament church (alluding to the enmity promised in Gen. 3:15).

The verb translated "cast" throughout this chapter is variously, ballo, ekballo [out], or kataballo [down/against]. This is the same verb used in Revelation 20:3, John 12:31, and Matthew 12:28, to which we previously referred. Other details of the vision differ from Revelation 9. In Revelation 9, the key of the bottomless pit given to Satan only allows him to open the bottomless pit to let loose demonic armies on the earth. In Revelation 20, a very different angel with a very different key of the bottomless pit (with a great chain) binds Satan, casts him into the bottomless pit, shuts him up, and sets a seal on him so that he can no longer deceive the nations. This seal does not mean that he cannot loose his demonic armies upon those who do not have the seal of God in their foreheads, nor does it mean that he cannot persecute the church upon the earth. Rather it means that his efforts and abilities are strictly limited. His demonic armies cannot hurt God's elect (Revelation 9), and his persecution cannot destroy the church (Revelation 12) or prevent the gathering of the church from all nations (in Revelation 20). Interpreted correctly, these visions teach exactly what the rest of Scripture teaches about Satan's power and its limits in the New Testament age.

When confronted with the same event or concept described in different places in Scripture by different visions or accounts, the typical tactic of dispensationalists is to propose that these are multiple events. So in warring against the essential unity of Scripture, they have multiple resurrections, multiple comings of Christ,  multiple final judgement, multiple kingdoms of God, multiple peoples of God, multiple covenants of God (not just multiple administrations or revelations), and even multiple new heavens and new earths. Now, the dispensationalist must propose multiple castings down of Satan, but how can he be cast down out of heaven again unless he somehow got back up into heaven? The absurdity of the dispensationalist scheme never fails to reach new depths.

Finally, Revelation 20 describes the loosing of Satan to deceive the nations to gather them together under the anti-christian beast and false prophet to make war against the church (Rev. 20:7-10). Until his "little season," he could not do achieve this goal. This restraint of Satan to prevent the coming of antichrist and the deceiving of the nations before the time is exactly what is described elsewhere:

And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time. 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. And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness (II Thess. 2:6-12).

The Kingdom Without End

A brother asked various questions about amillenialism which I think are worthwhile to share here because I find the answers edifying: How can the millennial kingdom of Revelation 20 be the kingdom that is promised forever and where this kingdom is now? How can we reign with Christ, when we are not yet perfectly holy, and the world is full of suffering and bloodshed? And why should Revelation 20 be interpreted figuratively, but Christ's coming must be a literal bodily event?

Some pertinent Scriptures to these questions are as follows:

But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus (Eph. 2:4-6).

If then you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your minds on things that are above, not on things that are on earth. For you have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God (Col. 3:1-3).

When Christ came preaching that the kingdom of heaven was at hand, and then suffered and died, and was raised up, even to be seated upon the throne in heaven, and given the name above all (i.e. Lord), this is the kingdom to which He referred (Luke 1:32-33). And this is the kingdom which His parables explain. And this is the kingdom which shall have no end, and which kingdom was prophesied in the Old Testament. This is the kingdom in which all Christians are citizens already, and even, by our union with Christ, already seated with Christ in this heavenly kingdom, as sharing in His anointing by the Spirit, so that we are all prophets, priests and kings. Now, a little, and weakly, hampered by sin, and only seen by faith, but after we have also suffered a little while, our reign will be more full, free, and glorious. Even now, having been born again into a new life, we fight as kings against our sinful flesh, bringing our bodies into subjection ("But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway," I Cor. 9:27), and triumph, making progress and taking ground, by the power of Christ.

When John saw the vision of the binding of Satan, ushering in the millennial kingdom, undoubtedly the same kingdom which Daniel saw, smashing the kingdoms of this world) which begins in the age for a "thousand" years and extends into eternity after the final judgement in the new heavens and new earth, he says, "Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed." (Rev. 20:4; cf. I Cor. 6:2-3). He describes these as the glorified saints, who were persecuted and martyred for their witness, which is given to all Christians to greater or lesser measure ("For it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake," Phil. 1:29):

Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. (Rev. 20:4)

This is a kingdom which the world cannot understand and cannot touch (Luke 17:21). Its power is from heaven and nothing can stand against it. The victory of this kingdom, and for all its citizens is assured. And though we walk now in the midst of earthly kingdoms and groan inwardly amidst our own sins and failures, we even now enjoy and partake in the spiritual blessings of this kingdom, which has not even yet reached its final consummation, as it will at the end of the age. And we are assured of its victory, even if the whole world appears to go after the antichristian beastly kingdom, because Christ (and we in Him) is already seated upon the throne in heaven, bringing all of history to the end which He has appointed, gathering His church, and hardening others so that this present evil age becomes fully ripe for the judgement at His coming.

Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us (Rom. 8:35-37).

Lastly, Revelation 20 is a vision, and therefore intended to be interpreted as figurative language. Revelation 1 explains this, as in fact, all other visions in Scripture. But the literal bodily coming of Christ, in the same way as He ascended, is taught in historical narrative and direct didactic teaching, which is absolutely not intended to be interpreted as a pictorial vision or allegory.

Which [angels] also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven. (Acts 1:11)

God loves the kosmos

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." - John 3:16

Please read your Bible correctly - this love is the love of God expressed in Him giving the greatest possible gift, the gift of His only begotten Son. Is this describing a lesser universal love? Does He have a greater love than this for the elect? Not only so, but the verse says "so", meaning "in this way" - this way God loved the "kosmos", that He gave His Son for the salvation of all who believe (that is, His sheep, those given by the Father, the elect).

Secondly, the very context: spoken at night in secret, to just one person. But significantly spoken to a Jew still thinking in Old Testament terms who thought the love of God was restricted to the Jews. Christ shows that God loves the whole world, every tongue, tribe, and nation, and so gave His Son for the salvation of all who believe. Not the descendants of Abraham therefore, and not merely the believing descendents of Abraham.

Thirdly, there is not one place in Scripture where "world" can be shown to mean "every single person throughout all history". In almost cases it very obviously cannot mean this: http://www.cprf.co.uk/articles/allmeansall.htm

Fourthly, where therefore does your definition of "world" come from? Is it from the context? Is it from the use of the word elsewhere in Scripture? Or is it simply your reading into the text your own pre-conceived ideas (or someone else's)?

Furthermore, in ransoming the elect, God saves the kosmos. By preserving a remnant saved from every tongue, tribe, and nation, God saves the entire world (Rev. 5:9). Did God need to save every animal and every human to save the kosmos through the Flood of Noah? No, rather, the destruction of the wicked was necessary for the salvation of the world.

Concerning the salvation of the kosmos, which God loves (the salvation of which rests on the salvation of the elect) the Scriptures say this:

"For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope, Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body." Romans 8:18-23.

The whole creation is included in God's everlasting covenant of grace:

"And God said, This is the token of the covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations: I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth. And it shall come to pass, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow shall be seen in the cloud: And I will remember my covenant, which is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh. And the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth. And God said unto Noah, This is the token of the covenant, which I have established between me and all flesh that is upon the earth." - Gen. 9:12-17.

The inheritance of the saints, is the new heavens and the new earth, renewed by God, as we are being, and will be - through fire. This kosmos was created for man to dwell in fellowship with God. But through the work and person of Christ, heaven and earth are united, and we who have borne the image of the earthy shall also bear the image of the heavenly, being equipped in the resurrection with a spiritual body by the last Adam: so that then the tabernacle of God will be with men, the final fulfillment and goal of the covenant will be realised and enjoyed forever.

"And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful." - Rev. 21:1-5.

See the problem is, people know sound-bites and superficial verses without understanding context, and without learning how the Bible fits together in glorious theology. And so they exude this confidence in their views, which doesn't stand contextual, theological scrutiny.

Our first principle must be that Scripture alone interprets Scripture, because it is God's Word, not ours. We must not let our own ideas run ahead.

Defence of Christianity Against a Proud Scoffer

In answer to a believer's query about science and the Bible, I referred to this website: http://www.creation.com.

A scoffer replied by comparing the highly qualified and intelligent authors of the material on this website to "The Banana Man" (so quickly that I concluded that he had in fact not even looked at the website), and advised me to only pay attention to "REAL scientists", by which I supposed he meant, those who attempt to explain the world in a materialistic framework regardless of how awkward and self-contradictory the fit becomes. To answer this challenge for the sake of the believer who had first made the query, not for the professed atheist (since if one denies the Bible outright, it is impossible to prove anything to them, and irrational to try to do so, and therefore argument with them is unprofitable), I responded:

Absolutely, of course I prefer the theories of scientists who dare not contradict God, who created everything and was there when all was created. Since those who deny Him, who is the Author of all truth and history, are nothing but willfully ignorant fools (Rom. 1:18ff), then of course I would be insane to take their proud imaginations seriously. If they deny the very first principle of all knowledge, then surely all their speculation is worthless. What need could I possibly have to pay heed to their vain attempts to ignorantly explain what is now seen, within such a self-contradictory and godless framework, intent on calling God a liar. But while men can lie and be deceived, it is impossible for God to lie. And those who call Him a liar are calling themselves, who are mere creatures, the Authors of truth; yet without God there is no truth. But they were born as wicked men only a few short years ago, are finite, and their lives are like the flower that fades and withers away quickly; they were not there to tell how things came to be. But God is from everlasting to everlasting, infinite in power and knowledge and wisdom, He was there, and none else.

The professed atheist then attempted to criticise the Christian faith on the basis that:

1. It only believes what reaffirms its presupposed ideas.
2. These ideas cannot be based upon "tangible evidence".
3. It is therefore, "deliberate stupidity".

Again, lest anyone be fooled by these empty and self-contradictory words, I responded:

Blind and godless Empiricism is also a presuppositional belief. The difference is that there is no man who has not heard the witness of God in their own consciences (and therefore their denial of it is universally self-evident, no matter how much evil men deny it), and since the Lord has graciously granted me faith, I believe God's testimony which is greater than any other, and indeed is the only way in which I can test all other witnesses, and see the world as He does, and apart from which, all my own interpretations would be merely groundless stabs in the dark. Hence, I have nothing to discuss with such lying fools as you, unless you assert that God alone is the authoritative Author of all truth, and denounce your own feeble understanding, in order to learn from Him how we are to interpret the data and evidence which He has set before us.

Not content with this (of course), the God-hater dug himself a deeper pit, by denying that his empiricism was presuppositional, and calling it rational instead (as if the latter did not demand the former)! And then he gave a definition of empiricism which he presented as a vindication of his philosophy, rather than its very indictment, which it actually was. He then also claimed that his criticism of Christianity was "kind and gentle", and that he was speaking for my benefit, and asked me to do the same as if he were willing to be persuaded (but of course, only upon his own presuppositional grounds of godless materialism, which is the very thing I refuse to do, and would consider wholly irrational), as if I had not already laid before him his errors. Since the believer responded by giving his own definitions of materialism and of theism, which were unsatisfactory, and did not display the folly of the professed atheist, nor the Bible's evaluation of such scoffers and their godless philosophies, I finally responded at length:

Materialism: Trusting in your own experiences and your own interpretations of those experiences, while willfully denying God's trustworthy testimony.

Biblical Theism: Trusting in God alone, by whose Word all our experiences must be tested and interpreted.

"I'd really hope someone would extend a hand of knowledge to me" - the Roman Catholics once put the Bible on their forbidden book list, but to you, I am sure it is readily available - even in your own language. How much less excuse then, you have for inventing your own theories about why the world is the way it is, when you refuse to learn from the Creator who is the only One whose testimony can be trusted altogether.

The natural world indeed speaks powerfully about the greatness of the divinity and power of God (Psalm 19; Rom. 1:18ff), and God has even given us eyes, ears and all the other senses by which we can perceive the created things and thereby know of the wisdom, divinity, and power of the One who created them. This witness is sufficient to leave us without excuse for our wickedness in not glorifying Him as God. No wonder then that many in our day deny this.

Yet if we deny this, by what means do we suppose we can trust anything we observe? What reason would we have to put any confidence in our senses? Would we not simply then we left adrift in nihilism, perhaps "I think therefore I am", and all our experience may be simply a dream? Therefore the atheist contradicts himself, when he speaks of empirical rationality, because if there is no God who does not lie, and who has created all things, and who has given us these senses, then there is no reason to presume that anything is real. This is why atheism, contrary to the popular, yet foolish misconception of it, is actually the death knell to all scientific endeavour, while true Christianity is its very foundation. And this is true both philosophically, and historically. Science was given birth by Christianity which believes in one Almighty God who created all things and orders them according to natural laws which only He may alter by miraculous works which display His sovereignty over these laws. Without this, all is merely proud, blind speculation, as I said.

But He has given a far greater light in the Scriptures by which we might see things as they truly are and understand God's purpose for them in His eternal will to glorify the Son through the salvation of the company of the predestinate by Him. By these Scriptures we understand the origin of the world, and the history of it (including the flood by which the world that then was, perished by water), and the purpose of it for the glory of God. And by these Scriptures too, it is revealed to those whom God grants the gift of faith, how we are to be saved from the terrible wrath which we deserve - and there is no greater blessedness than to have been given the knowledge and assurance of this. Those who believe these Scriptures are the only ones who can really tell about why things are the way they are (but even then, only to a very limited extent), and why things work the way they do.

Furthermore, the study of things as they currently are and as they currently work, cannot tell us how things were in the past, or even how things will be in the future. In Scripture this notion is explicitly denied (II Pet. 3), because God did not leave things to continue as they were from the beginning, but everything changed at the fall of Adam, and about 1500 years later, this wickedness had manifested itself so universally that God destroyed the world by water, in order to preserve the church, and so the world that we now see is the aftermath, and quite different. If a bomb causes a building to explode in to dust, do we suppose that we can tell by looking at the aftermath how things were beforehand? Maybe certain things can be speculated upon, but all is vanity if it is denied that the explosion ever occurred.

This is one example of the proud vanity of those who speculate upon the past.

As for the future, if one denies God's providence in upholding the world by the word of His power (just as they deny that He created it by the word of His power), then they again have nothing but groundless inductive reasoning to go by and it is folly also to presume that all things will also continue as they are. But Bible tells us that though we ought to plan ahead, we ought to do so in the fear of God and prayer, because we do not know what a day will bring forth. We cannot say what will happen tomorrow because it is God who is the author of history not us; we can only say that if the Lord wills, such and such will happen (James 4:13-16), and we must study Scripture to understand the will of God, and we trust in His good providence for His people, knowing that He works all things for the good of those whom He has loved with an everlasting love (Rom. 8:28ff).

The Bible explicitly condemns this notion too in the same passage (II Pet. 3), as coming from the mouths of scoffers who deny the Flood and the first coming of the incarnate Son of God. It explains that Christ will certainly return on the last day, to end history and destroy the world, this time by fire, and to judge the living and the dead. And it explains also that Christ is not slow in coming, but He is carrying out the Father's will, that He will not lose one of those whom the Father has given to Him (how could He since He is omnipotent and has paid fully for their sins by His own infinitely worthy sacrifice? - John 6:37-40; Rom. 5:9). So He is not willing that any should perish; He will bring all His elect to repentance and faith before He returns in judgment.

I have written this in defence of the Christian faith against the scoffers which were prophesied beforehand, which were ordained to this condemnation, but I hope that God would bring all who read this to repentance to the acknowledging of the truth, rather than for greater condemnation to be poured out on them for denying it - but if that is the Lord's will, then so be it.

 I hope that believers readers will understand more fully that the Christian faith has nothing to fear from scoffers who irrationally boast about their rationality. As our Canons of Dordt say in head 3/4, article 4:

There remain, however, in man since the fall, the glimmerings of natural light, whereby he retains some knowledge of God, of natural things, and of the differences between good and evil, and discovers some regard for virtue, good order in society, and for maintaining an orderly external deportment. But so far is this light of nature from being sufficient to bring him to a saving knowledge of God, and to true conversion, that he is incapable of using it aright even in things natural and civil. Nay further, this light, such as it is, man in various ways renders wholly polluted, and holds it in unrighteousness, by doing which he becomes inexcusable before God.

It is sometimes amazing to observe what proud boasts men make with only their mere glimmerings of natural rationality, and how they use it, as with all their remaining "wholly polluted" faculties, in the service of sin and the devil, endeavouring with all their powers to hate God will all manner of contrived blasphemies, and to oppose the work of Christ in the salvation of His people. But every observation of this, rather than puff us up, should instead remind us that we are no different except for the grace of God, and so we ought to take occasion to be more humbled, and to be more grateful to God, and exalt Him alone.

A brief Christian perspective on "Sustainable Development"

Sustainable Development is a popular concept these days - it is a buzz word that is driving significant changes in global policies, legislation, and economics. This is especially true in the European Union. It is important for Christians to look at the things that the world is obsessed about very carefully. As Christians, we do have a responsibility to be faithful and good stewards with what God has given us - to not use things wastefully or recklessly, and (as with everything) to seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness. And this is not an earthly kingdom, and so we view our responsibilities in that light, liberally giving to the work of the Gospel and supporting it by whatever means we have, especially in the local church and for the good of "the household of faith" (Gal. 6:10). But because this is only a proximate care that we have over these things, whereas God has the ultimate control over all, we ought not be anxious and worried about tomorrow. We also know that ultimately this present world is reserved for fire when Christ comes again, and until that time it will grow worse and worse until it is finally ripe for judgment (II Pet. 3).

The world on the other hand is very worried about tomorrow. And it is also only interested in using its resources for furthering the earthly kingdom of Antichrist. The key questions to ask about "sustainable development" are, "Sustainable for whom?", and, "Development of what?" The world has its own ideas about that, but we are interested in the reason that the world exists - the salvation of the church in Christ, made up of God's elect from every tongue, tribe and nation.

I once asked one of my lecturers (I studied Environmental Science) whether sustainable development was not simply an admirable but impossible goal, based on the second law of thermodynamics (neatly expressed as "rust and rot doth corrupt"). The truth is that this world bears witness of itself that it is "wearing away like a garment" and cannot last - and therefore our hope ought not to be in this world, but in "the city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God". But for the academics, economists and politicians of the world, their only hope is in this present evil age - and this is why they so strenuously fight for the idea of sustainable development.

As for climate change - it is not really scientific. This was the subject of my final year thesis at university, which I can send to anyone who is interested in reading more about it. Climate change is convenient hype to enforce more and more laws and policies in line with the world's philosophy of sustainable development. Things like this are likely to make living as a Reformed Christian very difficult in the days to come, as our freedoms are gradually eroded, and the world unites more and more in global governance for the kingdom of Antichrist. The influence of these philosophies is more evident in the EU than anywhere else in the world, in my opinion.

The Magnificat

"And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,
And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.
For He hath regarded the low estate of His handmaiden: for behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
For He that is mighty hath done to me great things; and holy is His name.
And His mercy is on them that fear Him from generation to generation.
He hath shewed strength with His arm; He scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.
He hath put down the mighty from their seats, and exalted them of low degree.
He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich He hath sent empty away.
He hath holpen His servant Israel, in remembrance of His mercy;
As He spake unto our fathers, to Abraham, and to his seed for ever." - Luke 1:46-55.

Greater joy filled the heart of Mary because of the fact that as a mother she might take her place among Israel's women, who in bringing forth their children labored in the blessed hope of the realization of the promise made to the fathers in times of yore. In the midst of sorrow the eye of these covenant women, believing the promise and looking for a heavenly country with faithful Abraham, looked hopefully far beyond the present and the things of this world, toward the blessed and everlasting reign of David's mighty Son. In this hope shared Mary. She looked forward to the realization of Israel's hope. But even this, though distinguishing her from so many thousands of women that labored in vain because they were laboring merely for the world, was not the cause of Mary's supreme joy and blessedness.

For even among these covenant women and believing Israelitish mothers, Mary occupied a place of unique distinction. Had not the angel that is standing before God mysteriously dropped the message from heaven that she would be mother though still a virgin? And had he not explained upon her anxious query how these things might be, that the power of the Most High would overshadow her and that He who was to be her Son forever would be called the Son of God and sit on David's throne forever? Were they, by heavenly injunction, not to call the name of her Son Jesus, because He would save His people from their sin? Mother of Israel's Savior, Mary was to be; the King of Kings was to assume her own flesh and blood! This was her unique privilege from the Lord.

And this glad hope was to be realized that very night!

But there was no place for them, not even in the inn. And because there was no place for them, there was no room for Him to Whom she was to give birth.

And it happened that even at the very moment of His birth, Jesus was crowded out to the very edge of the world. Born in a stable, laid in a manger!

Because there was no room for Him in the inn!
- "The Mystery of Bethlehem" by Herman Hoeksema, pp. 75-76.

One thing that I have learnt this year is that covenant mothers are greatly blessed (Prov. 31:28-31). Still today, they are blessed in bearing covenant children for they are the Lord's heritage (Psa. 127:3-5; Gen. 24:60), and now the mystery has been revealed that His church includes every tongue, tribe, and nation (Psa. 87:4-6; Eph. 3:3-6; Rev. 5:9). I've learnt that this is still one of the main ways that God uses to build up His church and gather His elect (Rom. 9:6-8; Acts 2:39; Isa. 59:21). It is one of the ways in which God accomplishes our salvation, since the Lord will not return to save us through the final judgment of this present evil age, until every last one of His elect has been brought to repentance (II Pet. 3:7-13). Not only are covenant mothers saved through child-bearing which is also the Lord's work in them (Psalm 127:1; I Tim. 2:15), but our salvation too in this way is brought in the way of their bearing of covenant children.

What an inestimable blessing the children of believing parents are (Psa. 128:3-6; Prov. 17:6; Mal. 2:15)! How important is our faithfulness in rearing them, and instructing them in the way of righteousness and holiness (Isa. 54:13; Matt. 28:20; Eph. 6:4; Psa. 78:1-8) - to trust only in our Saviour, being clothed in His righteousness only, and to be sanctified by the Spirit, consecrated to God in His loving service. And in this way too, covenant children are hated and despised by the world as Christ was. The world rejects us, because we are not of the world (John 15:18-19), even though for a short time we must labour and suffer in it (II Cor. 4:17; Phil. 1:29). For the elect covenant children too, there is no room in the inn.

But though we cannot find an earthly tabernacle in this present evil world ruled by Satan and his minions (Eph. 2:2; I John 2:15-16; Heb. 13:12-14), our fellowship is with our Father and His Son Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit who dwells in us (I John 1:3; I Cor. 6:19-20). Our tabernacle is with Him, and is heavenly (Rev. 21:2-4; Heb. 12:22-24). And so, when once more God will shake the world to remove all the reprobate chaff and all that may be shaken, our unshakeable tabernacle will remain (Heb. 12:26-29), and we will be with the Lord our Saviour forever. Let us not labour for what perishes, but for what will endure in the world to come (John 6:27; Matt. 6:19-21)!


How blessed covenant mothers are, to be used of God in such a marvellous way to build up His church, against which the gates of hell will not prevail (Matt. 16:18). And what hope we have still, when children of the church are born, children of Abraham (Gal. 3:29; Gen. 15:5) who must be innumerable as the stars of heaven and the sand of the shores! And when all have been gathered to His tabernacle, despite all the raging of the heathen (Psa. 2:1-8), as we see the signs of the times, our salvation will finally come.

"O turn unto me, and have mercy upon me; give thy strength unto thy servant, and save the son of thine handmaid. Show me a token for good; that they which hate me may see it, and be ashamed: because thou, LORD, hast helped me, and comforted me." - Psalm 86:16-17.

Happy Christmas to all the saints who love the Lord and the brethren unfeignedly!

Sam W.

Tales of the Visit of a Reformed Pastor to Limerick: Part II

I was also talking to Rev. Stewart a little about Erik Guichelaar's essay (related to evolutionism) in connection with the recent speech on Calvin vs. Darwin given in a Christian High School in the US. Angus suggested the great idea of putting it on our website, so I contacted Erik and did that the same week.

On Wednesday, we had a Bible study on I Peter 3:1-7. This was a very blessed time, as we discussed the Holy Scripture and meditated on it together and how it applies to us in so many ways. Of course there was much discussion about how the teachings here oppose the ungodly philosophy of the "feminist" movement. We also spoke about the dichotomy in verse 4 between the two different kinds of adornment (especially as it is important for a woman desiring to be sought by a godly man and a man desiring to seek a godly woman, but also in its intended context - that of a witness to an unbelieving husband for his salvation). It was a well-mixed group, and much profitable time was spent discussing the implications of the doctrine in verse 7 that husband ought to dwell with their wifes with understanding. One man who attended texted me early the next morning to say how much they had enjoyed this study. That week Ireland also lost one-nil to France at home, but fortunately we able to take that blow after such an uplifting Bible study.

On Friday then, we had our first lecture on “The Last Days,” and I had written a blogpost about this previously - making some comments about the bizarre philosophies of modern (or should I say modernist?) Irish Evangelicalism, insofar as they related. The lecture was a superb Scriptural explanation of sober eschatology - especially focused on a right exegesis of Acts 2. It showed absolutely conclusively that the last days reaches from the coming of our Immanuel, to the second coming, which in one event shall include the final resurrection, and the final judgment, and the ushering in of the new heavens and the new earth, etc - the consummation of all things and the end of days. It was argued that the last days are called the last days because there are no days after them (i.e. no earthly millenial kingdom!), and they finish with the last day (singular) which is also so-called because it is the final day with no more days after it.

One man commented at the end in astonishment, "You never used Revelation [the book]!" I think this is the source of a lot of confusion regarding eschatology - people immediately turn to the book in the Bible which perhaps requires the most intepretation using a comprehensive and thorough-going understanding of all the previous books, and so then they try to interpret it with little reference to the massive ground of revelation from which it draws its language, images, and ideas. No wonder with such a headstrong and ignorant approach to Scripture that the wild ideas from over-fertile imaginations of sinful men are so numerous. No, in contrast to this, if we speak of eschatology, the place to start is not the book of Revelation - the place to start is the simplest passages which speak most plainly.

No-one tries to work out a mathematics problem involving complex trigonometry and integration, without first having a thorough understanding of the basic algebra required, and even that is fruitless without the basics of arithmetic. But it is exactly our nature to turn things upside down and backwards in spiritual pride and ignorance. I remember Prof. Dykstra (of the PRTS) speaking about how many heresies come directly from ungodly hermeneutics. One friend enjoyed the lecture so much he felt like clapping afterwards. Another friend felt similarly, and they both bought some books I think - thankfully there were two copies of "Doctrine According to Godliness" by Ron Hanko, which is an absolute treasure, worth far more than the RFPA charge for it, and worth far more than its own weight in gold too.

More soon...

What's so important about the Last Days?

It is common in modern Irish Evangelicalism to speak of primary and secondary issues, whether they be of doctrine or practice. Often the primary issues are defined as those issues in which all Evangelicals are agreed. Naturally as more and more groups are accepted into Evangelicalism, with more and more erroneous and heretical views, these primary issues are being continually bombarded and slowly diminished from within. This arises out of necessity, for the inclusion of others who are automatically seen as genuine believers, because of another attitude within Irish Evangelicalism that shirks at any criticism (especially public) of any other religious group (including Rome, preferring to silently disagree). I would be inclined to call this "spinelessness" or "cowardice", and definitely being ashamed of Christ and His words (Mark 8:38), and definitely unloving.

Secondary issues are likewise, often defined as divisive issues - the issues which cause division between Christians. The prevailing attitude is not that these issues ought to be discussed so that agreement can be found, but rather in the hope of greater unity, that they ought not to be discussed and should be set aside as unimportant. The result of this, is that if a church, for example, strongly preaches a certain view of the Last Days, they are seen as needlessly divisive, and since their view is not universally agreed, they ought not to preach on the subject at all.

This view of doctrine is almost unquestioned, and even promoted as the true doctrine of the catholicity of the church. This is as if to say that if a church claims that her distinctive doctrines are true (and therefore the contrary views are wrong), that she is denying the catholicity of the church. She is guilty of being schismatic. Instead she ought to say we are all right (despite contradictions), or that we will never know on this side of eternity who is right. And since we do not know, or cannot know, we ought to preach only on the primary issues (which are continually being diminished). This view twists the old motto, “unity in diversity”, to define diversity as doctrinal diversity. And not surprisingly, this philosophy in practice usually does not result in silence on “secondary issues”, but rather it silences protests against all kinds of heresies; those of Romanists, other Arminians, Anabaptists, and Pentecostals, whose unchecked poisons then prevail in accelerating apostasy.

This is an ecclesiological heresy. The catholicity of the church is not that we must accept all doctrines as being equally true or valid. Indeed the catholicity of the church is not about diversity of doctrine at all (because there is one God, and therefore one Truth [John 14:6]), it is about believers from all tongues, tribes, and nations being equal in Christ, co-heirs with us all in all the promises of salvation - and this includes believers who are ethnically Jews. As our own Heidelberg Catechism explains this term found in the ancient Apostles' Creed:

Q. 54. What believest thou concerning the “holy catholic church” of Christ?
A. That the Son of God, from the beginning to the end of the world (John 10:11; Gen. 26:4), gathers (Rom. 9:24; Eph 1:10), defends, and preserves to Himself (John 10:16) by His Spirit and Word (Isa. 59:21), out of the whole human race (Deut. 10:14, 15), a church chosen to everlasting life (Acts 13:48), agreeing in true faith; and that I am, and for ever shall remain, a living member thereof (I Cor. 1:8, 9; Rom. 8:35ff).

Immediately this is the condemnation of all Jewish premillennial dispensationalism. All doctrines which teach a future earthly kingdom of the Jews are heretical - a gangrene which must be cut off because they inherently divide the body of Christ (Eph. 2:14-15; 3:6; 4:4), and hinder the true mission of the church - that of preaching the Gospel to every creature, and teaching them to observe all things commanded by God and baptising all nations (Matt. 28:18-20; Isa. 52:6-15).

Furthermore, this ecclesiological heresy proudly claims for itself special knowledge of what doctrines are important and what are not, and therefore what doctrines that ministers are allowed to preach, and what they must not preach. This is a dynamic, mystical, man-centred, and therefore unbiblical view of doctrine. Any preacher humbly devoted to God in his calling to preach, prayerfully studies the Bible as God's Word, which he must preach indiscriminately and uncompromisingly to be innocent of men's blood.

He understands that all the Bible is God's Word, and that the whole counsel of God must be preached (Acts 20:26-32), and that God's people are frail and weak spiritually, and full of sin, and need instructed, exhorted, reproved, and rebuked in every way to encourage them and build them up in unity, including doctrinal unity (Eph. 4:1-16; I Cor. 1:10; Phil. 2:1ff). He knows that "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.” And he knows that he must keep nothing back from them which is profitable (Acts 20:20). He has only one qualification for what he must preach – is it in the Bible? If it is, it must be preached!

That champion of the true biblical doctrine of justification through faith alone by grace alone, Martin Luther, says this far better than I could, speaking about what is perceived by Irish Evangelicalism as the most divisive (and therefore most forbidden) doctrine of all (though as much as it is crucial in cultivating true humility, the necessary prerequisite of unity, it is actually one of the most unifying doctrines of all):

“If, my Erasmus, you consider these paradoxes (as you term them) to be no more than the inventions of men, why are you so extravagantly heated on the occasion? In that case, your arguments affect not me, for there is no person now living in the world who is a more avowed enemy to the doctrines of men than myself. But if you believe the doctrines in debate between us to be (as indeed they are) the doctrines of God, you must have bid adieu [goodbye] to all sense of shame and decency thus to oppose them. I will not ask, 'Whither is the modesty of Erasmus fled?' but, which is much more important, 'Where, alas! are your fear and reverence of the Deity when you roundly declare that this branch of truth which He has revealed from heaven, is, at best, useless and unnecessary to be known?' What! shall the glorious Creator be taught by you, His creature, what is fit to be preached and what is to be suppressed? Is the adorable God so very defective in wisdom and prudence as not to know till you instruct Him what would be useful and what pernicious? Or could not He, whose understanding is infinite, foresee, previous to His revelation of this doctrine, what would be the consequences of His revealing it until those consequences were pointed out by you? You cannot, you dare not say this. If, then, it was the Divine pleasure to make known these things in His Word, and to bid His messengers to publish them abroad, and leave the consequences of their so doing to the wisdom and providence of Him in whose name they speak, and whose message they declare, who art thou, O Erasmus, that thou shouldest reply against God and say to the Almighty, 'What doest Thou?'

“St. Paul, discoursing of God, declares peremptorily, 'Whom He will He hardeneth,' and again, 'God willing to show His wrath,' etc. And the apostle did not write this to have it stifled among a few persons and buried in a corner, but wrote it to the Christians at Rome, which was in effect, bringing this doctrine upon the stage of the whole world, stamping an universal imprimatur [official approval for publication] upon it, and publishing it to believers at large throughout the earth. What can sound harsher in the uncircumcised ears of carnal men than those words of Christ, 'Many are called, but few chosen'? And elsewhere, 'I know whom I have chosen.' Now, these and similar assertions of Christ and His apostles are the very positions which you, O Erasmus, brand as useless and hurtful.”
- Martin Luther, “The Bondage of the Will”, sect. 23, as quoted in Jerome Zanchius, “Absolute Predestination”, pp. 96-97, Sovereign Grace Publishers.

Luther's testimony ought to sufficiently remove from all the godly, this heresy which teaches that man has the authority over what must be preached and what must not.

In this context many say that what we believe about the Last Days is simply unimportant. It is certain that not every detail about this time and the future is important (insofar as not every detail is given to us in Holy Scripture), but the general idea and our one blessed hope is. Wrong literalistic views of the millennium have this problem (aside from an over-emphasis on a very small portion of Scripture) – they predict a coming magnificent earthly kingdom of Christ as the great final triumph of the church. From this they say that we must be especially busy in politics, in the media, in economics, etc. to go about trying to carnally establish this carnal kingdom.

In this the supreme importance of Gospel-preaching is side-lined and neglected. The energy and resources of the church are spent on promoting the national Israel of 1948, or the institution of “Christian laws”, not on promiscuously proclaiming the Gospel to every creature. False eschatology (doctrine of last things) destroys the true mission of the church, and in fact plays into the hands of the great kingdom of anti-Christ that we know is even now developing. For this reason, all true preachers of the Gospel ought to denounce these errors wherever they are found.

The good news tells us that the kingdom of Christ is not an earthly one wherein dwelleth unrighteousness – it is spiritual and that this world is becoming ripe for judgment, so that through great tribulation we must enter the kingdom of heaven (Acts 14:22). This is good news, because even now we know that Christ is reigning in heaven and that in this way His glory and grace is most glorified through history and the salvation of His church from this present evil age. Our blessed hope, is in the personal return of our Lord Jesus Christ, who will usher in the new heavens and the new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness – and that alone. As Prof. David J. Engelsma puts it:

“As deaf to the testimony of history as it is to the witness of Scripture, theological modernism still stubbornly entertains the hope of a “golden age” for mankind by means of evolutionary development and the efforts especially of preachers, politicians, scientists, and teachers in the state schools. Rome has its French Jesuit philosopher, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, liberation theologians, and, as his recent encyclical, 'Charity in Truth', indicates, the present pope.

“Protestantism has its Paul Tillich and hosts of pastors whose message every Sunday morning is love for mankind (referred to as humankind), tolerance of everyone and everything (except uncompromising confession of the truth and unswerving obedience to the law of God), and the uniting of all the nations and peoples of the world (excluding the holy nation, which is the true church).

“Natural men and women are moved by this hope of an earthly paradise – a carnal 'kingdom of God'. American politicians seek votes with the vision of 'a new world order'. Lenin and Stalin won the hearts of millions, including liberals in the United States, by their announcement of the coming of the millennium in the form of Communism, regardless of Communism's avowed godlessness, mass murders, and dictatorial cruelties. Hitler bewitched virtually all of Germany, including multitudes of German Christians, with the prospect of the 'thousand-year Reich' – the millennial kingdom of the messianic Fuhrer – reared up though it was by war, bloodshed, and terror.

“With his millennium, Antichrist will seduce the world, including many nominal Christians, who do not have their heart set on the spiritual kingdom of Christ, revealed in the sound doctrine of the Gospel (II Thess. 2). The seduction of will be the arrival, at long last, of the millennial kingdom of God and Christ (as Antichrist's prophet, the beast out of the earth [Rev. 13:11ff.] will describe it) in its full, carnal, bedazzling, beguiling splendour and beneficence.

“From this conception of the millennium, the Reformed post-millenialists are anxious to distance themselves. Understandably. Well may they be anxious also that their conception of a carnal kingdom not play into the program of the 'king of fierce countenance', who 'by peace shall destroy many' (Dan. 8:23-25).”

- Standard Bearer, 86(2), October 15, 2009, p.36.

The final objection may be, that while this may a serious problem for many elsewhere, it is certainly not an issue here in Limerick. Anyone who knows what is preached in Irish Methodist and Presbyterian churches today (especially in Presbyterianism), and the popular notions in Mallow Street hall (Brethren-style dispensationalism), and the local Assemblies of God institution, Abundant Life, knows that heretical eschatology is a deep and spreading poison among “Evangelical” Christians in Limerick.

Against this, and in promotion of the positive biblical Gospel, the true testimony of Scripture about the Last Days will be proclaimed this Friday evening by Rev. Angus Stewart. If it is God's truth, no God-fearing saint ought to dare to call it divisive. God's truth always builds unity, and gathers the saints together – because Christ's sheep hear His voice and follow Him (John 10:26-31).