Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Site Update

Expand Messages
  • keith dotzler
    Bro Ted, You ve said it all in that short post! Sadly, it is a rare occasion when one comes across a professed protestant, who isn t a futurist or a
    Message 1 of 14 , Dec 4, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Bro Ted,
       
      You've said it all in that short post!  Sadly, it is a rare occasion when one comes across a professed "protestant," who isn't a futurist or a preterist.  In fact, outside of this list, I can count on one hand the number of truly Reformed Protestants that I've met AT PROTESTANT AND PURITAN DISCUSSION BOARDS....and I've been discussing this topic all over the web for around 3 years now!
       
      In case you weren't a member of this list when I made reference to Matt McMahon, founder of a website and discussion board called A Puritan's Mind, have a gander at the following.  All of the citations come from members of his so-called "puritan" discussion board.  In fact, they are all statements made by McMahon and his discussion board administrators...one and all professing to be of a puritan's mind...whatever that means in this day and age.  What follows was originally formatted to be included as an appendix to my recent site update.
       
      Hold on to your hat....
       
       
           

      I offer the following, from another who claims to be reformed and a Calvinist, yet opposes Calvin and the rest of the Reformers, as well as the very ones after whom he has named himself ("puritan sailor"), in denying the Pope to be the antichrist!

      �Here again, you are assuming the Antichrist is the Pope. You have not yet proven that. Just because the Reformers thought so doesn't make it right. Please give me your exegetical grounds for your perspective....Just because martyrs may identify someone as the antichrist doesn't mean they are correct. I must rely in Scripture alone. So if you can't give me your exegesis then at least give me theirs.�  (emphasis added)

      Not only has this puritan pretender trampled upon the blood of every last Christian martyr who named the Pope as the antichrist, but the brother to whom that whole paragraph was directed has a website PACKED with the testimony of the saints through the ages, all of which was at this puritan pretender's fingertips, had he been so inclined to acquaint himself with the subject matter at hand, before publicly making a fool of himself.  This so-called "puritan" pretends to be in search of a proper "exegesis" of Scripture regarding antichrist's identity, yet seems to be wholly oblivious to the fact that numerous works abounded during the Reformation era, and afterward, all of which prove the Pope of Rome to be that antichrist and man of sin foretold in Scripture, his false Church being Mystery Babylon.  He was just a mouse-click away from that which he sought, yet still had the unmitigated gall to ask for exegesis that proved the Pope of Rome to be the Antichrist! 

      How is one who throws around words like "exegesis" to be taken seriously, when he obviously hasn't educated himself in the works of those whom he claims as spiritual brethren, such as the Reformers and the Puritans?  If he rejects THEIR exegesis of Revelation chapters 13 and 17, or that of 2 Thessalonians chapter 2, what on earth, then, would suddenly cause him to accept the exegesis of the brother with whom he was having this discussion?  Who can call themselves a Puritan or a Reformed Protestant, and REJECT ALL of what the Reformers and Puritans taught concerning the identities of THE Antichrist, THE man of sin, and Mystery Babylon? 

      This so-called "puritan sailor" begs for exegesis...ANY exegesis...proving the Pope of Rome to be THE antichrist --, yet what do you suppose he did with it, when it was offered?  The exegesis of one William Perkins (a true Puritan) was offered to this puritan pretender, in the form of an excerpt from An Excellent Sermon Plainly Proving That Rome is Babylon, and That Babylon is Fallen (1595),as was Francis Turretin's 7th Disputation, Whether It Can Be Proven the Pope of Rome is the Antichrist (circa 1661).  How did the "puritan sailor" respond to the former?

      "Using Perkin's [sic] quote above, I find some flaws in exegesis."

      There you have it.  Not only would this arrogant puritan pretender reject the exegesis of anyone and everyone who would claim the Pope to be the Antichrist, but he obviously isn't even familiar enough with the real Puritan, with whom he finds these so-called flaws in exegesis, to know that his last name is NOT Perkin!   Strangely, he had nothing to say about Turretin's exegesis...probably because he didn't bother reading it.

      Here are some more ignorant proclamations from the puritan pretender:

      The book of Revelation would have very little application to first century Christians if the Pope was the Antichrist simple [sic] because there was no Pope.

      There is no disagreement that the Pope is antichristian. And, there's probably no disagreement that the Pope most likely embodied the greatest spirit of antichrist during the Reformation. But that is not the case anymore. The spirit of antichrist is much greater in scope than Roman Catholicism.�  (emphasis added)
       

      And have a look at this gem, from a "reformed" pastor:

      �The Bible nowhere outright states that the Pope of Rome is the antichrist. The Bible is clear that there have been and will continue to be many antichrists, and while some will say that the Pope is an antichrist, declaring such is not a litmus test for orthodoxy.�
       

      Lastly, observe the following, which was the response I received from the very well-educated founder of a "Puritan" website. I asked him, �Who/what is the man of sin of 2 Thes 2?�  Knowing his familiarity with Reformed doctrine, as well as how vast his personal library must be, knowing he owns the Reformation Bookshelf and Puritan Bookshelf CD sets from Still Waters Revival Books...62 CDs in all, I found his response to my simple question to be arrogant, high-minded, mind-blowing, and simply a slap in the face to those Reformers and Puritans who proclaimed truths that he, with this ridiculous answer, denies.  Who does this "puritan" pseudo-scholar make the man of sin to be?  Observe: 

      �Antichristian government or pressures in the world. 

      And, to make matters worse, he later told me that,

      �The Antichrist himself was not Pope Innocent the III, or Pope John Paul 1st.  We will have to 'see' who may be the 'one' 'giant' Antichrist, that man of sin, when he arises to the scene. (emphasis added)

      This so-called "puritan" not only looks for the man of sin (whom he had just said was "antichristian government") to be an individual man (one "giant" Antichrist), but he also denies that the man of sin had already been on the scene more than 700 years ago, and looks for him to first come on the scene at some FUTURE DATE (as do the papists)!  Thus, he outright denies what millions of ancient Christians, Reformers, Puritans, and post-reformers before him have ALL proclaimed (many to their deaths), viz., that the man of sin, the antichrist, the beast, was not to come at some point in the future, but was the one that was killing Christians, and was the one reigning IN THEIR MIDST, with his seat and harlot church both residing in Rome! 

      The above men will quickly claim that they believe the papacy is antichrist, as did the founder, mentioned above, in an e-mail correspondence with me (see below), but notice how they word such an empty creedal statement.  They make sure to leave out the article THE, and refer to the papacy as just "antichrist," "antichristian," or "AN antichrist."  They just can't bring their intellects down from out of the clouds to embrace that which was revelaed to millions of martyred brethren over the last millennium:  the papacy is THE antichrist, THE man of sin, and THE beast from the sea! 

      Here are some questions I put to the founder, via e-mail.  His responses are in blue:

      1)  Who/what is the beast that rose out of the sea, in Rev 13?  Devil - the hand of the devil
      2)  Who/what is the man of sin of 2 Thes 2?  Antichristian government or pressures in the world
      3)  Who/what is the little horn of Daniel 9?  Antichrist government or pressures in the world
      4)  Who/what is Mystery, Babylon the Great of Rev 17?   Possibly the Roman Catholic Church (see WCF)
      5)  Who/what is the beast that rose out of the earth, in Rev 13?   Devil - the wisdom of the devil
      6)  Who/what is the "let" of 2 Thes 2?  "no one", then the Antichristian influences
      7)  Who/what are the Locusts of Rev 9?  The power and influences of hell over wicked men
      8)  Who/what are the two witnesses of Rev 11?   The church militant - the preaching of the word and sacraments
      9)  What is the mark, name, and number of the beast, in Rev 13?  Unregenerate influences against the church
       
       
      Notice his response to question #4.  He implies the WCF could be right about Mystery Babylon's identity, but he himself won't be dogmatic about it!  What's more, when a good friend of mine said the following to one of the administrators in a PRIVATE e-mail exchange, he was promptly banned from the discussion board!
       
      "The infallible Word of God states explicitly that if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part of the book of life....
       
      The official sanctioned website of the OPC has willfully and maliciously - not from ignorance - deleted the identity of the arch-enemy of Christ and His Church, thus re-inventing the true interpretation of the Revelation which Christ infallibly wills His Elect know and understand. Of course, you must know the PCA has done likewise."
       
      Perkins and Turretin, to whom these men are particularly partial, must be rolling in their graves!
       
      One will search high and low on McMahon's website for any mention of the papal antichrist and his church, Mystery Babylon.  I find this a STARTLING revelation, considering the fact that during the Reformation era, naming antichrist and his harlot church proceeded directly out of, and was a natural result of, preaching salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone...the two proclamations, combined, being the very justification for separating from the Church of Rome!  How that founder can claim to have "a puritan's mind," yet keep the elect IN THE DARK as to THE antichrist's true identity is truly a mystery.  To make matters worse, he allows preterists to openly posit their heresy at his so-called "puritan" board.  As long as "Christ crucified" is the uniting mantra, all are welcome to insert their particular heresies without fear of chastisement or excommunication...as long as you don't pass judgment on a "reformed" Church that has expunged the identity of the man of sin from the WCF! 
       
      What that "puritan" founder IS, in fact, is a closet-futurist.  He said the following to me, in the course of our e-mail "debate:"
      "The office of the Antichrist is the papal succession.  The Antichrist himself was not Pope Innocent the III, or Pope John Paul 1st.  We will have to "see" who may be the "one" "giant" Antichrist, that man of sin, when he arises to the scene.  We can say that the line is Antichrist (and I do)." 
       
      Notice his little deceptive play on words, as he tries to make me believe he is in agreement with the Reformers and Puritans through the ages, regarding the identity of the antichrist: 
       
      "We can say that the line is Antichrist (and I do)." 
       
      The line of popes are ANTICHRIST, and the OFFICE of the Antichrist IS the papal succession, but it isn't THE ANTICHRIST.  In other words, McMahon believes the office of popes to be antichristian, and that THE Antichrist will come from that succession...but he isn't here today, nor has he come in the past. 
       
      "We will have to "see" who may be the "one" "giant" Antichrist, that man of sin, when he arises to the scene."
       
      All one has to do is look at this "puritan's" response to my 9 questions above, and his absolute opposition to the very ones he claims as spiritual ancestors is immediately made known!  Truly the wheat is being sifted from the tares, as, day after day, month after month, more and more who claim to be "reformed protestants" are showing themselves to be in bed with ROME, as they find all sorts of creative ways to relegate the antichrist's reign of terror to the past or the future, but never to the present.  
       
      "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."
       
      They received not the love of the truth because they were sent strong delusion by God Himself.  These are obviosuly reprobates who were fitted for destruction from the foundation of the world....for the Lord never UN-elects one of His elect to damn them.  These false Christians -- tares among the wheat -- because they never received a love of the truth (a mark of being elect), believed a LIE.
       
      The "truth" that was not believed cannot refer to "rejecting the Gospel," as some believe.  The topic of the chapter is not the Gospel, but the revealing of the man of sin.  Therefore, the LIE that is believed is directly related to the revealing of the man of sin.
       
       
      Lord come quickly!
       
      Take care,
      Keith
       
       
       
       
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: 12/3/2004 5:06:48 PM
      Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Site Update

      Keith,
       
      what I find odd is that "conservative" (not liberal) Calvinists can't even accept it from Calvin himself in the Institutes--THE primary source of the Reformed Reformation. but yet they can accept Preterism from Sproul and others--a blatant heresy (partial or otherwise). Let's see...Calvin wrong; Sproul right!? 
       
      Amongst confessional Lutherans I have never met one who did not toally agree with Luther on the Antichrist. Not one! Why is that? I think it is because the Reformed claim to be "Reformed...but always Reforming," so in some respects these Reformed are more like Rome: the faith keeps getting revised like Bill Gate's Microsoft Word, so that only the "latest" version is the correct version. Thanks God you have been led to keep these works available.
       
      Ted

      keith dotzler <kdotz@...> wrote:
      I appreciate that bro Ted.  There are many more such works in my arsenal, which I wish to share with the brethren over the course of the coming years.  I only wish those fancy Caligraphic old English fonts wouldn't have been used...because then I could scan them, rather than having to transcribe them by hand!    ;-)
       
      Though it's time consuming to place such excerpts on the web, it's a very small price to pay....
       
      As a professing Christian (during my Arminian days), I was wholly ignorant of the existence of such works for over 11 years! 
       
      Even after my eyes were opened to the Doctrines of Grace a couple years back, I had so-called "reformed Calvinists" telling me that eschatology was all but passed over by the Reformers and post reformers, and that belief in a pre-trib rapture and premillennialism were Biblically sound, and wholly compatible with CALVINISM and REFORMED PROTESTANISM!!!  After all, you know the standard line used by those who think they're more intelligent and more in tune with the Spirit than the Reformers were: "they were only men."
       
      I have discovered, first-hand, that all who claim the name of "reformed Protestant," who say that the subject of Antichrist rarely came up before, during, or after the Reformation, are ignorantly speaking words without knowledge (to their shame).
       
      Having done the leg work necessary to acquire...
      • the MANY treatises on Antichrist that circulated during the 16th and 17th centuries (Turretin, Beard, Bradshaw, Daneau, Deios, Garrett, Gwalther, Jones, Rainolds, Osiander, Sohn, Hall, Zwingli, Becon, Barnes, Downame, Whitaker, Tyndale, Luther, etc),
      • as well as the NUMEROUS commentaries on the Revelation from the same era (Holland, Fulke, Pareus, Newton, Brightman, Mede, Junius, More, Durham, Dent, Cotton, Perkins, Cartwright, Bale),
      • not to mention the 16th & 17th century commentaries on 2 Thessalonians (Tymme, Fergusson, Squire, Jewel, Manton, Bullinger, Fulke, and Cartwright), 
      ....I find it simply INCREDIBLE that so many, many "reformed" brethren could even muster up the THOUGHT that antichrist was a non-issue...let alone making those ignorant thoughts PUBLIC!  How can such a vast library be missed?
       
      Sadly, multitudes who name the name of Christ have absolutely no idea that the testimony of the saints of the last 7+ centuries has been preserved for us in various forms....all of which points the true Church of God to the identity of the man of sin and his harlot Church -- Mystery Babylon.  These treasures are crassly cast aside and ignored by the intellectuals among us -- relegated to the "works of men" bin. 
       
      Today's professing apostate Christian thinks it more "godly" to shout "give me the Bible and nothing else," than to examine the writings of our departed brethren, to see what they believed and WHY.   Some of these pretenders then get positions in their local churches TEACHING others the false "truths" they received of the Spirit, while studying their Bible and nothing else.   Then comes the day when one of his students asks him about the identity of the antichrist.  The teacher, proud of the fact that he has his Bible and nothing else, proudly proclaims,
       
      "Why, we obviously can't know who he is, until he's revealed after the rapture!"     
       
      But, says the student, the historic Church over the course of the last 7 centuries, with one voice, has proclaimed that the Pope of Rome is the Antichrist. 
       
      "Well," says the teacher, "they were just men.  You shouldn't put much stock in their commentaries and other writings.  The Bible alone will give you the answers, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit." 
       
      Well, says the student, first of all, aren't YOU a man? 
       
      Secondly, if the Holy Spirit guides us into all truth, and if he has already guided the historic Church of the last 7 centuries into the truth about the Antichrist's identity, and if we now ignore that revelation and await our own, wouldn't we be rejecting the truth? 
       
      Thirdly, of what use are teachers, preachers, evangelists, pastors, etc, if we aren't to LISTEN TO THEM? 
       
       
       
      Take care,
      Keith 
       
       
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: 12/1/2004 10:09:29 PM
      Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Site Update

      What I attempted to say below was that I very much enjoyed the website noted by Keith below and am happy to see those important documents yet out there for all to read...for now.
       
      Ted

      urces are out thre and still readable...for now...
       
      Ted

      keith dotzler <kdotz@...> wrote:

      Friends,
       
      Our site has been updated.  
       
       
       
       
       
      In Christ,
      Keith Dotzler
       



      Do you Yahoo!?
      The all-new My Yahoo! � Get yours free!


      Do you Yahoo!?
      All your favorites on one personal page � Try My Yahoo!



      Do you Yahoo!?
      Jazz up your holiday email with celebrity designs. Learn more.

    • Theodore Letis
      Keith, You handled this perfectly. This is the rot that is coming out of PCA/OPC semianries, and from the Sproul/Packer pastor-graduates from these schools of
      Message 2 of 14 , Dec 6, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Keith,
         
        You handled this perfectly. This is the rot that is coming out of PCA/OPC semianries, and from the Sproul/Packer pastor-graduates from these schools of the addle-minded. You nailed them justifiably by pointing out they are no more Puritan (or Reformed, for that matter) than are modern Methodists. But they are too ignorant to be able to blush when this is pointed out to them. The internet has done us much good, but that bad it has accomplished in turning knats in to draggons under the magnification of "attention-getting" from being someone in cyberspace, almost makes me wish for an earlier time, pre-internet "academics."
         
        Ted

        keith dotzler <kdotz@...> wrote:
        Bro Ted,
         
        You've said it all in that short post!  Sadly, it is a rare occasion when one comes across a professed "protestant," who isn't a futurist or a preterist.  In fact, outside of this list, I can count on one hand the number of truly Reformed Protestants that I've met AT PROTESTANT AND PURITAN DISCUSSION BOARDS....and I've been discussing this topic all over the web for around 3 years now!
         
        In case you weren't a member of this list when I made reference to Matt McMahon, founder of a website and discussion board called A Puritan's Mind, have a gander at the following.  All of the citations come from members of his so-called "puritan" discussion board.  In fact, they are all statements made by McMahon and his discussion board administrators...one and all professing to be of a puritan's mind...whatever that means in this day and age.  What follows was originally formatted to be included as an appendix to my recent site update.
         
        Hold on to your hat....
         
         
             

        I offer the following, from another who claims to be reformed and a Calvinist, yet opposes Calvin and the rest of the Reformers, as well as the very ones after whom he has named himself ("puritan sailor"), in denying the Pope to be the antichrist!

        �Here again, you are assuming the Antichrist is the Pope. You have not yet proven that. Just because the Reformers thought so doesn't make it right. Please give me your exegetical grounds for your perspective....Just because martyrs may identify someone as the antichrist doesn't mean they are correct. I must rely in Scripture alone. So if you can't give me your exegesis then at least give me theirs.�  (emphasis added)

        Not only has this puritan pretender trampled upon the blood of every last Christian martyr who named the Pope as the antichrist, but the brother to whom that whole paragraph was directed has a website PACKED with the testimony of the saints through the ages, all of which was at this puritan pretender's fingertips, had he been so inclined to acquaint himself with the subject matter at hand, before publicly making a fool of himself.  This so-called "puritan" pretends to be in search of a proper "exegesis" of Scripture regarding antichrist's identity, yet seems to be wholly oblivious to the fact that numerous works abounded during the Reformation era, and afterward, all of which prove the Pope of Rome to be that antichrist and man of sin foretold in Scripture, his false Church being Mystery Babylon.  He was just a mouse-click away from that which he sought, yet still had the unmitigated gall to ask for exegesis that proved the Pope of Rome to be the Antichrist! 

        How is one who throws around words like "exegesis" to be taken seriously, when he obviously hasn't educated himself in the works of those whom he claims as spiritual brethren, such as the Reformers and the Puritans?  If he rejects THEIR exegesis of Revelation chapters 13 and 17, or that of 2 Thessalonians chapter 2, what on earth, then, would suddenly cause him to accept the exegesis of the brother with whom he was having this discussion?  Who can call themselves a Puritan or a Reformed Protestant, and REJECT ALL of what the Reformers and Puritans taught concerning the identities of THE Antichrist, THE man of sin, and Mystery Babylon? 

        This so-called "puritan sailor" begs for exegesis...ANY exegesis...proving the Pope of Rome to be THE antichrist --, yet what do you suppose he did with it, when it was offered?  The exegesis of one William Perkins (a true Puritan) was offered to this puritan pretender, in the form of an excerpt from An Excellent Sermon Plainly Proving That Rome is Babylon, and That Babylon is Fallen (1595),as was Francis Turretin's 7th Disputation, Whether It Can Be Proven the Pope of Rome is the Antichrist (circa 1661).  How did the "puritan sailor" respond to the former?

        "Using Perkin's [sic] quote above, I find some flaws in exegesis."

        There you have it.  Not only would this arrogant puritan pretender reject the exegesis of anyone and everyone who would claim the Pope to be the Antichrist, but he obviously isn't even familiar enough with the real Puritan, with whom he finds these so-called flaws in exegesis, to know that his last name is NOT Perkin!   Strangely, he had nothing to say about Turretin's exegesis...probably because he didn't bother reading it.

        Here are some more ignorant proclamations from the puritan pretender:

        The book of Revelation would have very little application to first century Christians if the Pope was the Antichrist simple [sic] because there was no Pope.

        There is no disagreement that the Pope is antichristian. And, there's probably no disagreement that the Pope most likely embodied the greatest spirit of antichrist during the Reformation. But that is not the case anymore. The spirit of antichrist is much greater in scope than Roman Catholicism.�  (emphasis added)
         

        And have a look at this gem, from a "reformed" pastor:

        �The Bible nowhere outright states that the Pope of Rome is the antichrist. The Bible is clear that there have been and will continue to be many antichrists, and while some will say that the Pope is an antichrist, declaring such is not a litmus test for orthodoxy.�
         

        Lastly, observe the following, which was the response I received from the very well-educated founder of a "Puritan" website. I asked him, �Who/what is the man of sin of 2 Thes 2?�  Knowing his familiarity with Reformed doctrine, as well as how vast his personal library must be, knowing he owns the Reformation Bookshelf and Puritan Bookshelf CD sets from Still Waters Revival Books...62 CDs in all, I found his response to my simple question to be arrogant, high-minded, mind-blowing, and simply a slap in the face to those Reformers and Puritans who proclaimed truths that he, with this ridiculous answer, denies.  Who does this "puritan" pseudo-scholar make the man of sin to be?  Observe: 

        �Antichristian government or pressures in the world. 

        And, to make matters worse, he later told me that,

        �The Antichrist himself was not Pope Innocent the III, or Pope John Paul 1st.  We will have to 'see' who may be the 'one' 'giant' Antichrist, that man of sin, when he arises to the scene. (emphasis added)

        This so-called "puritan" not only looks for the man of sin (whom he had just said was "antichristian government") to be an individual man (one "giant" Antichrist), but he also denies that the man of sin had already been on the scene more than 700 years ago, and looks for him to first come on the scene at some FUTURE DATE (as do the papists)!  Thus, he outright denies what millions of ancient Christians, Reformers, Puritans, and post-reformers before him have ALL proclaimed (many to their deaths), viz., that the man of sin, the antichrist, the beast, was not to come at some point in the future, but was the one that was killing Christians, and was the one reigning IN THEIR MIDST, with his seat and harlot church both residing in Rome! 

        The above men will quickly claim that they believe the papacy is antichrist, as did the founder, mentioned above, in an e-mail correspondence with me (see below), but notice how they word such an empty creedal statement.  They make sure to leave out the article THE, and refer to the papacy as just "antichrist," "antichristian," or "AN antichrist."  They just can't bring their intellects down from out of the clouds to embrace that which was revelaed to millions of martyred brethren over the last millennium:  the papacy is THE antichrist, THE man of sin, and THE beast from the sea! 

        Here are some questions I put to the founder, via e-mail.  His responses are in blue:

        1)  Who/what is the beast that rose out of the sea, in Rev 13?  Devil - the hand of the devil
        2)  Who/what is the man of sin of 2 Thes 2?  Antichristian government or pressures in the world
        3)  Who/what is the little horn of Daniel 9?  Antichrist government or pressures in the world
        4)  Who/what is Mystery, Babylon the Great of Rev 17?   Possibly the Roman Catholic Church (see WCF)
        5)  Who/what is the beast that rose out of the earth, in Rev 13?   Devil - the wisdom of the devil
        6)  Who/what is the "let" of 2 Thes 2?  "no one", then the Antichristian influences
        7)  Who/what are the Locusts of Rev 9?  The power and influences of hell over wicked men
        8)  Who/what are the two witnesses of Rev 11?   The church militant - the preaching of the word and sacraments
        9)  What is the mark, name, and number of the beast, in Rev 13?  Unregenerate influences against the church
         
         
        Notice his response to question #4.  He implies the WCF could be right about Mystery Babylon's identity, but he himself won't be dogmatic about it!  What's more, when a good friend of mine said the following to one of the administrators in a PRIVATE e-mail exchange, he was promptly banned from the discussion board!
         
        "The infallible Word of God states explicitly that if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part of the book of life....
         
        The official sanctioned website of the OPC has willfully and maliciously - not from ignorance - deleted the identity of the arch-enemy of Christ and His Church, thus re-inventing the true interpretation of the Revelation which Christ infallibly wills His Elect know and understand. Of course, you must know the PCA has done likewise."
         
        Perkins and Turretin, to whom these men are particularly partial, must be rolling in their graves!
         
        One will search high and low on McMahon's website for any mention of the papal antichrist and his church, Mystery Babylon.  I find this a STARTLING revelation, considering the fact that during the Reformation era, naming antichrist and his harlot church proceeded directly out of, and was a natural result of, preaching salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone...the two proclamations, combined, being the very justification for separating from the Church of Rome!  How that founder can claim to have "a puritan's mind," yet keep the elect IN THE DARK as to THE antichrist's true identity is truly a mystery.  To make matters worse, he allows preterists to openly posit their heresy at his so-called "puritan" board.  As long as "Christ crucified" is the uniting mantra, all are welcome to insert their particular heresies without fear of chastisement or excommunication...as long as you don't pass judgment on a "reformed" Church that has expunged the identity of the man of sin from the WCF! 
         
        What that "puritan" founder IS, in fact, is a closet-futurist.  He said the following to me, in the course of our e-mail "debate:"
        "The office of the Antichrist is the papal succession.  The Antichrist himself was not Pope Innocent the III, or Pope John Paul 1st.  We will have to "see" who may be the "one" "giant" Antichrist, that man of sin, when he arises to the scene.  We can say that the line is Antichrist (and I do)." 
         
        Notice his little deceptive play on words, as he tries to make me believe he is in agreement with the Reformers and Puritans through the ages, regarding the identity of the antichrist: 
         
        "We can say that the line is Antichrist (and I do)." 
         
        The line of popes are ANTICHRIST, and the OFFICE of the Antichrist IS the papal succession, but it isn't THE ANTICHRIST.  In other words, McMahon believes the office of popes to be antichristian, and that THE Antichrist will come from that succession...but he isn't here today, nor has he come in the past. 
         
        "We will have to "see" who may be the "one" "giant" Antichrist, that man of sin, when he arises to the scene."
         
        All one has to do is look at this "puritan's" response to my 9 questions above, and his absolute opposition to the very ones he claims as spiritual ancestors is immediately made known!  Truly the wheat is being sifted from the tares, as, day after day, month after month, more and more who claim to be "reformed protestants" are showing themselves to be in bed with ROME, as they find all sorts of creative ways to relegate the antichrist's reign of terror to the past or the future, but never to the present.  
         
        "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."
         
        They received not the love of the truth because they were sent strong delusion by God Himself.  These are obviosuly reprobates who were fitted for destruction from the foundation of the world....for the Lord never UN-elects one of His elect to damn them.  These false Christians -- tares among the wheat -- because they never received a love of the truth (a mark of being elect), believed a LIE.
         
        The "truth" that was not believed cannot refer to "rejecting the Gospel," as some believe.  The topic of the chapter is not the Gospel, but the revealing of the man of sin.  Therefore, the LIE that is believed is directly related to the revealing of the man of sin.
         
        Lord come quickly!
         
        Take care,
        Keith
         
         
         
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: 12/3/2004 5:06:48 PM
        Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Site Update

        Keith,
         
        what I find odd is that "conservative" (not liberal) Calvinists can't even accept it from Calvin himself in the Institutes--THE primary source of the Reformed Reformation. but yet they can accept Preterism from Sproul and others--a blatant heresy (partial or otherwise). Let's see...Calvin wrong; Sproul right!? 
         
        Amongst confessional Lutherans I have never met one who did not toally agree with Luther on the Antichrist. Not one! Why is that? I think it is because the Reformed claim to be "Reformed...but always Reforming," so in some respects these Reformed are more like Rome: the faith keeps getting revised like Bill Gate's Microsoft Word, so that only the "latest" version is the correct version. Thanks God you have been led to keep these works available.
         
        Ted

        keith dotzler <kdotz@...> wrote:
        I appreciate that bro Ted.  There are many more such works in my arsenal, which I wish to share with the brethren over the course of the coming years.  I only wish those fancy Caligraphic old English fonts wouldn't have been used...because then I could scan them, rather than having to transcribe them by hand!    ;-)
         
        Though it's time consuming to place such excerpts on the web, it's a very small price to pay....
         
        As a professing Christian (during my Arminian days), I was wholly ignorant of the existence of such works for over 11 years! 
         
        Even after my eyes were opened to the Doctrines of Grace a couple years back, I had so-called "reformed Calvinists" telling me that eschatology was all but passed over by the Reformers and post reformers, and that belief in a pre-trib rapture and premillennialism were Biblically sound, and wholly compatible with CALVINISM and REFORMED PROTESTANISM!!!  After all, you know the standard line used by those who think they're more intelligent and more in tune with the Spirit than the Reformers were: "they were only men."
         
        I have discovered, first-hand, that all who claim the name of "reformed Protestant," who say that the subject of Antichrist rarely came up before, during, or after the Reformation, are ignorantly speaking words without knowledge (to their shame).
         
        Having done the leg work necessary to acquire...
        • the MANY treatises on Antichrist that circulated during the 16th and 17th centuries (Turretin, Beard, Bradshaw, Daneau, Deios, Garrett, Gwalther, Jones, Rainolds, Osiander, Sohn, Hall, Zwingli, Becon, Barnes, Downame, Whitaker, Tyndale, Luther, etc),
        • as well as the NUMEROUS commentaries on the Revelation from the same era (Holland, Fulke, Pareus, Newton, Brightman, Mede, Junius, More, Durham, Dent, Cotton, Perkins, Cartwright, Bale),
        • not to mention the 16th & 17th century commentaries on 2 Thessalonians (Tymme, Fergusson, Squire, Jewel, Manton, Bullinger, Fulke, and Cartwright), 
        ....I find it simply INCREDIBLE that so many, many "reformed" brethren could even muster up the THOUGHT that antichrist was a non-issue...let alone making those ignorant thoughts PUBLIC!  How can such a vast library be missed?
         
        Sadly, multitudes who name the name of Christ have absolutely no idea that the testimony of the saints of the last 7+ centuries has been preserved for us in various forms....all of which points the true Church of God to the identity of the man of sin and his harlot Church -- Mystery Babylon.  These treasures are crassly cast aside and ignored by the intellectuals among us -- relegated to the "works of men" bin. 
         
        Today's professing apostate Christian thinks it more "godly" to shout "give me the Bible and nothing else," than to examine the writings of our departed brethren, to see what they believed and WHY.   Some of these pretenders then get positions in their local churches TEACHING others the false "truths" they received of the Spirit, while studying their Bible and nothing else.   Then comes the day when one of his students asks him about the identity of the antichrist.  The teacher, proud of the fact that he has his Bible and nothing else, proudly proclaims,
         
        "Why, we obviously can't know who he is, until he's revealed after the rapture!"     
         
        But, says the student, the historic Church over the course of the last 7 centuries, with one voice, has proclaimed that the Pope of Rome is the Antichrist. 
         
        "Well," says the teacher, "they were just men.  You shouldn't put much stock in their commentaries and other writings.  The Bible alone will give you the answers, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit." 
         
        Well, says the student, first of all, aren't YOU a man? 
         
        Secondly, if the Holy Spirit guides us into all truth, and if he has already guided the historic Church of the last 7 centuries into the truth about the Antichrist's identity, and if we now ignore that revelation and await our own, wouldn't we be rejecting the truth? 
         
        Thirdly, of what use are teachers, preachers, evangelists, pastors, etc, if we aren't to LISTEN TO THEM? 
         
         
         
        Take care,
        Keith 
         
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: 12/1/2004 10:09:29 PM
        Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Site Update

        What I attempted to say below was that I very much enjoyed the website noted by Keith below and am happy to see those important documents yet out there for all to read...for now.
         
        Ted

        urces are out thre and still readable...for now...
         
        Ted

        keith dotzler <kdotz@...> wrote:

        Friends,
         
        Our site has been updated.  
         
         
         
         
         
        In Christ,
        Keith Dotzler
         



        Do you Yahoo!?
        The all-new My Yahoo! � Get yours free!


        Do you Yahoo!?
        All your favorites on one personal page � Try My Yahoo!



        Do you Yahoo!?
        Jazz up your holiday email with celebrity designs. Learn more.



        Do you Yahoo!?
        All your favorites on one personal page � Try My Yahoo!

      • Robbie Stark
        Packer I understand as he sold his soul BACK to Rome, (So to speak), but, what is your issue/problem with Sproul? Calling him NOT Reformed? I am all ears
        Message 3 of 14 , Dec 6, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Packer I understand as he sold his soul BACK to Rome, (So to speak), but, what is your issue/problem with Sproul?  Calling him NOT Reformed?  I am all ears
           
          Robbie  ( Who firmly believes calling Rome the most evil institution on earth, to be an understatement!)
           
           
           
           
          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 10:23 AM
          Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Site Update

          Keith,
           
          You handled this perfectly. This is the rot that is coming out of PCA/OPC semianries, and from the Sproul/Packer pastor-graduates from these schools of the addle-minded. You nailed them justifiably by pointing out they are no more Puritan (or Reformed, for that matter) than are modern Methodists. But they are too ignorant to be able to blush when this is pointed out to them. The internet has done us much good, but that bad it has accomplished in turning knats in to draggons under the magnification of "attention-getting" from being someone in cyberspace, almost makes me wish for an earlier time, pre-internet "academics."
           
          Ted

          keith dotzler <kdotz@...> wrote:
          Bro Ted,
           
          You've said it all in that short post!  Sadly, it is a rare occasion when one comes across a professed "protestant," who isn't a futurist or a preterist.  In fact, outside of this list, I can count on one hand the number of truly Reformed Protestants that I've met AT PROTESTANT AND PURITAN DISCUSSION BOARDS....and I've been discussing this topic all over the web for around 3 years now!
           
          In case you weren't a member of this list when I made reference to Matt McMahon, founder of a website and discussion board called A Puritan's Mind, have a gander at the following.  All of the citations come from members of his so-called "puritan" discussion board.  In fact, they are all statements made by McMahon and his discussion board administrators...one and all professing to be of a puritan's mind...whatever that means in this day and age.  What follows was originally formatted to be included as an appendix to my recent site update.
           
          Hold on to your hat....
           
           
               

          I offer the following, from another who claims to be reformed and a Calvinist, yet opposes Calvin and the rest of the Reformers, as well as the very ones after whom he has named himself ("puritan sailor"), in denying the Pope to be the antichrist! —

          “Here again, you are assuming the Antichrist is the Pope. You have not yet proven that. Just because the Reformers thought so doesn't make it right. Please give me your exegetical grounds for your perspective....Just because martyrs may identify someone as the antichrist doesn't mean they are correct. I must rely in Scripture alone. So if you can't give me your exegesis then at least give me theirs.”  (emphasis added)

          Not only has this puritan pretender trampled upon the blood of every last Christian martyr who named the Pope as the antichrist, but the brother to whom that whole paragraph was directed has a website PACKED with the testimony of the saints through the ages, all of which was at this puritan pretender's fingertips, had he been so inclined to acquaint himself with the subject matter at hand, before publicly making a fool of himself.  This so-called "puritan" pretends to be in search of a proper "exegesis" of Scripture regarding antichrist's identity, yet seems to be wholly oblivious to the fact that numerous works abounded during the Reformation era, and afterward, all of which prove the Pope of Rome to be that antichrist and man of sin foretold in Scripture, his false Church being Mystery Babylon.  He was just a mouse-click away from that which he sought, yet still had the unmitigated gall to ask for exegesis that proved the Pope of Rome to be the Antichrist! 

          How is one who throws around words like "exegesis" to be taken seriously, when he obviously hasn't educated himself in the works of those whom he claims as spiritual brethren, such as the Reformers and the Puritans?  If he rejects THEIR exegesis of Revelation chapters 13 and 17, or that of 2 Thessalonians chapter 2, what on earth, then, would suddenly cause him to accept the exegesis of the brother with whom he was having this discussion?  Who can call themselves a Puritan or a Reformed Protestant, and REJECT ALL of what the Reformers and Puritans taught concerning the identities of THE Antichrist, THE man of sin, and Mystery Babylon? 

          This so-called "puritan sailor" begs for exegesis...ANY exegesis...proving the Pope of Rome to be THE antichrist --, yet what do you suppose he did with it, when it was offered?  The exegesis of one William Perkins (a true Puritan) was offered to this puritan pretender, in the form of an excerpt from An Excellent Sermon Plainly Proving That Rome is Babylon, and That Babylon is Fallen (1595),as was Francis Turretin's 7th Disputation, Whether It Can Be Proven the Pope of Rome is the Antichrist (circa 1661).  How did the "puritan sailor" respond to the former?

          "Using Perkin's [sic] quote above, I find some flaws in exegesis."

          There you have it.  Not only would this arrogant puritan pretender reject the exegesis of anyone and everyone who would claim the Pope to be the Antichrist, but he obviously isn't even familiar enough with the real Puritan, with whom he finds these so-called flaws in exegesis, to know that his last name is NOT Perkin!   Strangely, he had nothing to say about Turretin's exegesis...probably because he didn't bother reading it.

          Here are some more ignorant proclamations from the puritan pretender:

          “The book of Revelation would have very little application to first century Christians if the Pope was the Antichrist simple [sic] because there was no Pope.”

          “There is no disagreement that the Pope is antichristian. And, there's probably no disagreement that the Pope most likely embodied the greatest spirit of antichrist during the Reformation. But that is not the case anymore. The spirit of antichrist is much greater in scope than Roman Catholicism.”  (emphasis added)
           

          And have a look at this gem, from a "reformed" pastor:

          “The Bible nowhere outright states that the Pope of Rome is the antichrist. The Bible is clear that there have been and will continue to be many antichrists, and while some will say that the Pope is an antichrist, declaring such is not a litmus test for orthodoxy.”
           

          Lastly, observe the following, which was the response I received from the very well-educated founder of a "Puritan" website. I asked him, “Who/what is the man of sin of 2 Thes 2?”  Knowing his familiarity with Reformed doctrine, as well as how vast his personal library must be, knowing he owns the Reformation Bookshelf and Puritan Bookshelf CD sets from Still Waters Revival Books...62 CDs in all, I found his response to my simple question to be arrogant, high-minded, mind-blowing, and simply a slap in the face to those Reformers and Puritans who proclaimed truths that he, with this ridiculous answer, denies.  Who does this "puritan" pseudo-scholar make the man of sin to be?  Observe: 

          “Antichristian government or pressures in the world.” 

          And, to make matters worse, he later told me that,

          “The Antichrist himself was not Pope Innocent the III, or Pope John Paul 1st.  We will have to 'see' who may be the 'one' 'giant' Antichrist, that man of sin, when he arises to the scene.” (emphasis added)

          This so-called "puritan" not only looks for the man of sin (whom he had just said was "antichristian government") to be an individual man (one "giant" Antichrist), but he also denies that the man of sin had already been on the scene more than 700 years ago, and looks for him to first come on the scene at some FUTURE DATE (as do the papists)!  Thus, he outright denies what millions of ancient Christians, Reformers, Puritans, and post-reformers before him have ALL proclaimed (many to their deaths), viz., that the man of sin, the antichrist, the beast, was not to come at some point in the future, but was the one that was killing Christians, and was the one reigning IN THEIR MIDST, with his seat and harlot church both residing in Rome! 

          The above men will quickly claim that they believe the papacy is antichrist, as did the founder, mentioned above, in an e-mail correspondence with me (see below), but notice how they word such an empty creedal statement.  They make sure to leave out the article THE, and refer to the papacy as just "antichrist," "antichristian," or "AN antichrist."  They just can't bring their intellects down from out of the clouds to embrace that which was revelaed to millions of martyred brethren over the last millennium:  the papacy is THE antichrist, THE man of sin, and THE beast from the sea! 

          Here are some questions I put to the founder, via e-mail.  His responses are in blue:

          1)  Who/what is the beast that rose out of the sea, in Rev 13?  Devil - the hand of the devil
          2)  Who/what is the man of sin of 2 Thes 2?  Antichristian government or pressures in the world
          3)  Who/what is the little horn of Daniel 9?  Antichrist government or pressures in the world
          4)  Who/what is Mystery, Babylon the Great of Rev 17?   Possibly the Roman Catholic Church (see WCF)
          5)  Who/what is the beast that rose out of the earth, in Rev 13?   Devil - the wisdom of the devil
          6)  Who/what is the "let" of 2 Thes 2?  "no one", then the Antichristian influences
          7)  Who/what are the Locusts of Rev 9?  The power and influences of hell over wicked men
          8)  Who/what are the two witnesses of Rev 11?   The church militant - the preaching of the word and sacraments
          9)  What is the mark, name, and number of the beast, in Rev 13?  Unregenerate influences against the church
           
           
          Notice his response to question #4.  He implies the WCF could be right about Mystery Babylon's identity, but he himself won't be dogmatic about it!  What's more, when a good friend of mine said the following to one of the administrators in a PRIVATE e-mail exchange, he was promptly banned from the discussion board!
           
          "The infallible Word of God states explicitly that if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part of the book of life....
           
          The official sanctioned website of the OPC has willfully and maliciously - not from ignorance - deleted the identity of the arch-enemy of Christ and His Church, thus re-inventing the true interpretation of the Revelation which Christ infallibly wills His Elect know and understand. Of course, you must know the PCA has done likewise."
           
          Perkins and Turretin, to whom these men are particularly partial, must be rolling in their graves!
           
          One will search high and low on McMahon's website for any mention of the papal antichrist and his church, Mystery Babylon.  I find this a STARTLING revelation, considering the fact that during the Reformation era, naming antichrist and his harlot church proceeded directly out of, and was a natural result of, preaching salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone...the two proclamations, combined, being the very justification for separating from the Church of Rome!  How that founder can claim to have "a puritan's mind," yet keep the elect IN THE DARK as to THE antichrist's true identity is truly a mystery.  To make matters worse, he allows preterists to openly posit their heresy at his so-called "puritan" board.  As long as "Christ crucified" is the uniting mantra, all are welcome to insert their particular heresies without fear of chastisement or excommunication...as long as you don't pass judgment on a "reformed" Church that has expunged the identity of the man of sin from the WCF! 
           
          What that "puritan" founder IS, in fact, is a closet-futurist.  He said the following to me, in the course of our e-mail "debate:"
          "The office of the Antichrist is the papal succession.  The Antichrist himself was not Pope Innocent the III, or Pope John Paul 1st.  We will have to "see" who may be the "one" "giant" Antichrist, that man of sin, when he arises to the scene.  We can say that the line is Antichrist (and I do)." 
           
          Notice his little deceptive play on words, as he tries to make me believe he is in agreement with the Reformers and Puritans through the ages, regarding the identity of the antichrist: 
           
          "We can say that the line is Antichrist (and I do)." 
           
          The line of popes are ANTICHRIST, and the OFFICE of the Antichrist IS the papal succession, but it isn't THE ANTICHRIST.  In other words, McMahon believes the office of popes to be antichristian, and that THE Antichrist will come from that succession...but he isn't here today, nor has he come in the past. 
           
          "We will have to "see" who may be the "one" "giant" Antichrist, that man of sin, when he arises to the scene."
           
          All one has to do is look at this "puritan's" response to my 9 questions above, and his absolute opposition to the very ones he claims as spiritual ancestors is immediately made known!  Truly the wheat is being sifted from the tares, as, day after day, month after month, more and more who claim to be "reformed protestants" are showing themselves to be in bed with ROME, as they find all sorts of creative ways to relegate the antichrist's reign of terror to the past or the future, but never to the present.  
           
          "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."
           
          They received not the love of the truth because they were sent strong delusion by God Himself.  These are obviosuly reprobates who were fitted for destruction from the foundation of the world....for the Lord never UN-elects one of His elect to damn them.  These false Christians -- tares among the wheat -- because they never received a love of the truth (a mark of being elect), believed a LIE.
           
          The "truth" that was not believed cannot refer to "rejecting the Gospel," as some believe.  The topic of the chapter is not the Gospel, but the revealing of the man of sin.  Therefore, the LIE that is believed is directly related to the revealing of the man of sin.
           
          Lord come quickly!
           
          Take care,
          Keith
           
           
           
           
          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: 12/3/2004 5:06:48 PM
          Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Site Update

          Keith,
           
          what I find odd is that "conservative" (not liberal) Calvinists can't even accept it from Calvin himself in the Institutes--THE primary source of the Reformed Reformation. but yet they can accept Preterism from Sproul and others--a blatant heresy (partial or otherwise). Let's see...Calvin wrong; Sproul right!? 
           
          Amongst confessional Lutherans I have never met one who did not toally agree with Luther on the Antichrist. Not one! Why is that? I think it is because the Reformed claim to be "Reformed...but always Reforming," so in some respects these Reformed are more like Rome: the faith keeps getting revised like Bill Gate's Microsoft Word, so that only the "latest" version is the correct version. Thanks God you have been led to keep these works available.
           
          Ted

          keith dotzler <kdotz@...> wrote:
          I appreciate that bro Ted.  There are many more such works in my arsenal, which I wish to share with the brethren over the course of the coming years.  I only wish those fancy Caligraphic old English fonts wouldn't have been used...because then I could scan them, rather than having to transcribe them by hand!    ;-)
           
          Though it's time consuming to place such excerpts on the web, it's a very small price to pay....
           
          As a professing Christian (during my Arminian days), I was wholly ignorant of the existence of such works for over 11 years! 
           
          Even after my eyes were opened to the Doctrines of Grace a couple years back, I had so-called "reformed Calvinists" telling me that eschatology was all but passed over by the Reformers and post reformers, and that belief in a pre-trib rapture and premillennialism were Biblically sound, and wholly compatible with CALVINISM and REFORMED PROTESTANISM!!!  After all, you know the standard line used by those who think they're more intelligent and more in tune with the Spirit than the Reformers were: "they were only men."
           
          I have discovered, first-hand, that all who claim the name of "reformed Protestant," who say that the subject of Antichrist rarely came up before, during, or after the Reformation, are ignorantly speaking words without knowledge (to their shame).
           
          Having done the leg work necessary to acquire...
          • the MANY treatises on Antichrist that circulated during the 16th and 17th centuries (Turretin, Beard, Bradshaw, Daneau, Deios, Garrett, Gwalther, Jones, Rainolds, Osiander, Sohn, Hall, Zwingli, Becon, Barnes, Downame, Whitaker, Tyndale, Luther, etc),
          • as well as the NUMEROUS commentaries on the Revelation from the same era (Holland, Fulke, Pareus, Newton, Brightman, Mede, Junius, More, Durham, Dent, Cotton, Perkins, Cartwright, Bale),
          • not to mention the 16th & 17th century commentaries on 2 Thessalonians (Tymme, Fergusson, Squire, Jewel, Manton, Bullinger, Fulke, and Cartwright), 
          ....I find it simply INCREDIBLE that so many, many "reformed" brethren could even muster up the THOUGHT that antichrist was a non-issue...let alone making those ignorant thoughts PUBLIC!  How can such a vast library be missed?
           
          Sadly, multitudes who name the name of Christ have absolutely no idea that the testimony of the saints of the last 7+ centuries has been preserved for us in various forms....all of which points the true Church of God to the identity of the man of sin and his harlot Church -- Mystery Babylon.  These treasures are crassly cast aside and ignored by the intellectuals among us -- relegated to the "works of men" bin. 
           
          Today's professing apostate Christian thinks it more "godly" to shout "give me the Bible and nothing else," than to examine the writings of our departed brethren, to see what they believed and WHY.   Some of these pretenders then get positions in their local churches TEACHING others the false "truths" they received of the Spirit, while studying their Bible and nothing else.   Then comes the day when one of his students asks him about the identity of the antichrist.  The teacher, proud of the fact that he has his Bible and nothing else, proudly proclaims,
           
          "Why, we obviously can't know who he is, until he's revealed after the rapture!"     
           
          But, says the student, the historic Church over the course of the last 7 centuries, with one voice, has proclaimed that the Pope of Rome is the Antichrist. 
           
          "Well," says the teacher, "they were just men.  You shouldn't put much stock in their commentaries and other writings.  The Bible alone will give you the answers, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit." 
           
          Well, says the student, first of all, aren't YOU a man? 
           
          Secondly, if the Holy Spirit guides us into all truth, and if he has already guided the historic Church of the last 7 centuries into the truth about the Antichrist's identity, and if we now ignore that revelation and await our own, wouldn't we be rejecting the truth? 
           
          Thirdly, of what use are teachers, preachers, evangelists, pastors, etc, if we aren't to LISTEN TO THEM? 
           
           
           
          Take care,
          Keith 
           
           
          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: 12/1/2004 10:09:29 PM
          Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Site Update

          What I attempted to say below was that I very much enjoyed the website noted by Keith below and am happy to see those important documents yet out there for all to read...for now.
           
          Ted

          urces are out thre and still readable...for now...
           
          Ted

          keith dotzler <kdotz@...> wrote:

          Friends,
           
          Our site has been updated.  
           
           
           
           
           
          In Christ,
          Keith Dotzler
           



          Do you Yahoo!?
          The all-new My Yahoo! – Get yours free!


          Do you Yahoo!?
          All your favorites on one personal page – Try My Yahoo!



          Do you Yahoo!?
          Jazz up your holiday email with celebrity designs. Learn more.



          Do you Yahoo!?
          All your favorites on one personal page – Try My Yahoo!

        • Edgar A. Ibarra Jr.
          For starters, like most Reformed churches of today, he stops at the 5-points of Calvinism. Most Presbyterian & Reformed churches & theologians of today
          Message 4 of 14 , Dec 6, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            For starters, like most "Reformed" churches of today, he stops at
            the 5-points of Calvinism. Most "Presbyterian" & "Reformed"
            churches & theologians of today deny the Regulative Principle of
            Worship & hence partake of the Romish fundamental sin of will-worship
            (man, not God, determines what is acceptable to offer up to God in
            public worship, i.e. singing man-made hymns [Watts, Welsey, et al],
            breaking the Lord's Day, observing Xmas, Good Friday, & Easter),
            denying true Biblical Presbyterianism, denying the whole doctrine of
            Covenanting, denying that the Papacy is the Anti-Christ, &
            tolerating denominationalism and making excuses for the serious
            division that exists in Christ's body.

            I am sure others can add to this...

            Reformed/Presbyterian/Calvinsim is the most purest & faithful
            expression of Christianity...the doctrine...not necessarily always
            the adherents...and the Covenanted Reformation was the crowning
            jewel until Oliver Cromwell and the Stuarts came in to crush the
            Truth and the compromised Presbyterians propogated it (the
            suppresion)...even until this day...

            For the Covenanted Reformation
            that brings true biblical unity,

            Edgar Ibarra
            Albany NY
            RPNA

            --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Robbie Stark
            <igrus@o...> wrote:
            > Packer I understand as he sold his soul BACK to Rome, (So to
            speak), but, what is your issue/problem with Sproul? Calling him
            NOT Reformed? I am all ears
            >
            > Robbie ( Who firmly believes calling Rome the most evil
            institution on earth, to be an understatement!)
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: Theodore Letis
            > To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
            > Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 10:23 AM
            > Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Site Update
            >
            >
            > Keith,
            >
            > You handled this perfectly. This is the rot that is coming out
            of PCA/OPC semianries, and from the Sproul/Packer pastor-graduates
            from these schools of the addle-minded. You nailed them justifiably
            by pointing out they are no more Puritan (or Reformed, for that
            matter) than are modern Methodists. But they are too ignorant to be
            able to blush when this is pointed out to them. The internet has
            done us much good, but that bad it has accomplished in turning knats
            in to draggons under the magnification of "attention-getting" from
            being someone in cyberspace, almost makes me wish for an earlier
            time, pre-internet "academics."
            >
            > Ted
            >
            > keith dotzler <kdotz@e...> wrote:
            > Bro Ted,
            >
            > You've said it all in that short post! Sadly, it is a rare
            occasion when one comes across a professed "protestant," who isn't a
            futurist or a preterist. In fact, outside of this list, I can count
            on one hand the number of truly Reformed Protestants that I've met
            AT PROTESTANT AND PURITAN DISCUSSION BOARDS....and I've been
            discussing this topic all over the web for around 3 years now!
            >
            > In case you weren't a member of this list when I made
            reference to Matt McMahon, founder of a website and discussion board
            called A Puritan's Mind, have a gander at the following. All of the
            citations come from members of his so-called "puritan" discussion
            board. In fact, they are all statements made by McMahon and his
            discussion board administrators...one and all professing to be of a
            puritan's mind...whatever that means in this day and age. What
            follows was originally formatted to be included as an appendix to my
            recent site update.
            >
            > Hold on to your hat....
            >
            >
            >
            > I offer the following, from another who claims to be reformed
            and a Calvinist, yet opposes Calvin and the rest of the Reformers,
            as well as the very ones after whom he has named himself ("puritan
            sailor"), in denying the Pope to be the antichrist! -
            >
            > "Here again, you are assuming the Antichrist is the Pope.
            You have not yet proven that. Just because the Reformers thought so
            doesn't make it right. Please give me your exegetical grounds for
            your perspective....Just because martyrs may identify someone as the
            antichrist doesn't mean they are correct. I must rely in Scripture
            alone. So if you can't give me your exegesis then at least give me
            theirs." (emphasis added)
            >
            > Not only has this puritan pretender trampled upon the blood of
            every last Christian martyr who named the Pope as the antichrist,
            but the brother to whom that whole paragraph was directed has a
            website PACKED with the testimony of the saints through the ages,
            all of which was at this puritan pretender's fingertips, had he been
            so inclined to acquaint himself with the subject matter at hand,
            before publicly making a fool of himself. This so-called "puritan"
            pretends to be in search of a proper "exegesis" of Scripture
            regarding antichrist's identity, yet seems to be wholly oblivious to
            the fact that numerous works abounded during the Reformation era,
            and afterward, all of which prove the Pope of Rome to be that
            antichrist and man of sin foretold in Scripture, his false Church
            being Mystery Babylon. He was just a mouse-click away from that
            which he sought, yet still had the unmitigated gall to ask for
            exegesis that proved the Pope of Rome to be the Antichrist!
            >
            > How is one who throws around words like "exegesis" to be taken
            seriously, when he obviously hasn't educated himself in the works of
            those whom he claims as spiritual brethren, such as the Reformers
            and the Puritans? If he rejects THEIR exegesis of Revelation
            chapters 13 and 17, or that of 2 Thessalonians chapter 2, what on
            earth, then, would suddenly cause him to accept the exegesis of the
            brother with whom he was having this discussion? Who can call
            themselves a Puritan or a Reformed Protestant, and REJECT ALL of
            what the Reformers and Puritans taught concerning the identities of
            THE Antichrist, THE man of sin, and Mystery Babylon?
            >
            > This so-called "puritan sailor" begs for exegesis...ANY
            exegesis...proving the Pope of Rome to be THE antichrist --, yet
            what do you suppose he did with it, when it was offered? The
            exegesis of one William Perkins (a true Puritan) was offered to this
            puritan pretender, in the form of an excerpt from An Excellent
            Sermon Plainly Proving That Rome is Babylon, and That Babylon is
            Fallen (1595),as was Francis Turretin's 7th Disputation, Whether It
            Can Be Proven the Pope of Rome is the Antichrist (circa 1661). How
            did the "puritan sailor" respond to the former?
            >
            > "Using Perkin's [sic] quote above, I find some flaws in
            exegesis."
            >
            > There you have it. Not only would this arrogant puritan
            pretender reject the exegesis of anyone and everyone who would claim
            the Pope to be the Antichrist, but he obviously isn't even familiar
            enough with the real Puritan, with whom he finds these so-called
            flaws in exegesis, to know that his last name is NOT Perkin!
            Strangely, he had nothing to say about Turretin's
            exegesis...probably because he didn't bother reading it.
            >
            > Here are some more ignorant proclamations from the puritan
            pretender:
            >
            > "The book of Revelation would have very little application
            to first century Christians if the Pope was the Antichrist simple
            [sic] because there was no Pope."
            >
            > "There is no disagreement that the Pope is antichristian.
            And, there's probably no disagreement that the Pope most likely
            embodied the greatest spirit of antichrist during the Reformation.
            But that is not the case anymore. The spirit of antichrist is much
            greater in scope than Roman Catholicism." (emphasis added)
            >
            >
            > And have a look at this gem, from a "reformed" pastor:
            >
            > "The Bible nowhere outright states that the Pope of Rome is
            the antichrist. The Bible is clear that there have been and will
            continue to be many antichrists, and while some will say that the
            Pope is an antichrist, declaring such is not a litmus test for
            orthodoxy."
            >
            >
            > Lastly, observe the following, which was the response I
            received from the very well-educated founder of a "Puritan" website.
            I asked him, "Who/what is the man of sin of 2 Thes 2?" Knowing his
            familiarity with Reformed doctrine, as well as how vast his personal
            library must be, knowing he owns the Reformation Bookshelf and
            Puritan Bookshelf CD sets from Still Waters Revival Books...62 CDs
            in all, I found his response to my simple question to be arrogant,
            high-minded, mind-blowing, and simply a slap in the face to those
            Reformers and Puritans who proclaimed truths that he, with this
            ridiculous answer, denies. Who does this "puritan" pseudo-scholar
            make the man of sin to be? Observe:
            >
            > "Antichristian government or pressures in the world."
            >
            > And, to make matters worse, he later told me that,
            >
            > "The Antichrist himself was not Pope Innocent the III, or
            Pope John Paul 1st. We will have to 'see' who may be
            the 'one' 'giant' Antichrist, that man of sin, when he arises to the
            scene." (emphasis added)
            >
            > This so-called "puritan" not only looks for the man of sin
            (whom he had just said was "antichristian government") to be an
            individual man (one "giant" Antichrist), but he also denies that the
            man of sin had already been on the scene more than 700 years ago,
            and looks for him to first come on the scene at some FUTURE DATE (as
            do the papists)! Thus, he outright denies what millions of ancient
            Christians, Reformers, Puritans, and post-reformers before him have
            ALL proclaimed (many to their deaths), viz., that the man of sin,
            the antichrist, the beast, was not to come at some point in the
            future, but was the one that was killing Christians, and was the one
            reigning IN THEIR MIDST, with his seat and harlot church both
            residing in Rome!
            >
            > The above men will quickly claim that they believe the papacy
            is antichrist, as did the founder, mentioned above, in an e-mail
            correspondence with me (see below), but notice how they word such an
            empty creedal statement. They make sure to leave out the article
            THE, and refer to the papacy as just "antichrist," "antichristian,"
            or "AN antichrist." They just can't bring their intellects down
            from out of the clouds to embrace that which was revelaed to
            millions of martyred brethren over the last millennium: the papacy
            is THE antichrist, THE man of sin, and THE beast from the sea!
            >
            > Here are some questions I put to the founder, via e-mail. His
            responses are in blue:
            >
            > 1) Who/what is the beast that rose out of the sea, in Rev
            13? Devil - the hand of the devil
            > 2) Who/what is the man of sin of 2 Thes 2? Antichristian
            government or pressures in the world
            > 3) Who/what is the little horn of Daniel 9? Antichrist
            government or pressures in the world
            > 4) Who/what is Mystery, Babylon the Great of Rev 17?
            Possibly the Roman Catholic Church (see WCF)
            > 5) Who/what is the beast that rose out of the earth, in Rev
            13? Devil - the wisdom of the devil
            > 6) Who/what is the "let" of 2 Thes 2? "no one", then the
            Antichristian influences
            > 7) Who/what are the Locusts of Rev 9? The power and
            influences of hell over wicked men
            > 8) Who/what are the two witnesses of Rev 11? The church
            militant - the preaching of the word and sacraments
            > 9) What is the mark, name, and number of the beast, in Rev
            13? Unregenerate influences against the church
            >
            >
            > Notice his response to question #4. He implies the WCF could
            be right about Mystery Babylon's identity, but he himself won't be
            dogmatic about it! What's more, when a good friend of mine said the
            following to one of the administrators in a PRIVATE e-mail exchange,
            he was promptly banned from the discussion board!
            >
            > "The infallible Word of God states explicitly that if any
            man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God
            shall take away his part of the book of life....
            >
            > The official sanctioned website of the OPC has willfully and
            maliciously - not from ignorance - deleted the identity of the arch-
            enemy of Christ and His Church, thus re-inventing the true
            interpretation of the Revelation which Christ infallibly wills His
            Elect know and understand. Of course, you must know the PCA has done
            likewise."
            >
            > Perkins and Turretin, to whom these men are particularly
            partial, must be rolling in their graves!
            >
            > One will search high and low on McMahon's website for any
            mention of the papal antichrist and his church, Mystery Babylon. I
            find this a STARTLING revelation, considering the fact that during
            the Reformation era, naming antichrist and his harlot church
            proceeded directly out of, and was a natural result of, preaching
            salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone...the
            two proclamations, combined, being the very justification for
            separating from the Church of Rome! How that founder can claim to
            have "a puritan's mind," yet keep the elect IN THE DARK as to THE
            antichrist's true identity is truly a mystery. To make matters
            worse, he allows preterists to openly posit their heresy at his so-
            called "puritan" board. As long as "Christ crucified" is the
            uniting mantra, all are welcome to insert their particular heresies
            without fear of chastisement or excommunication...as long as you
            don't pass judgment on a "reformed" Church that has expunged the
            identity of the man of sin from the WCF!
            >
            > What that "puritan" founder IS, in fact, is a closet-
            futurist. He said the following to me, in the course of our e-
            mail "debate:"
            > "The office of the Antichrist is the papal succession. The
            Antichrist himself was not Pope Innocent the III, or Pope John Paul
            1st. We will have to "see" who may be the "one" "giant" Antichrist,
            that man of sin, when he arises to the scene. We can say that the
            line is Antichrist (and I do)."
            >
            > Notice his little deceptive play on words, as he tries to make
            me believe he is in agreement with the Reformers and Puritans
            through the ages, regarding the identity of the antichrist:
            >
            > "We can say that the line is Antichrist (and I do)."
            >
            > The line of popes are ANTICHRIST, and the OFFICE of the
            Antichrist IS the papal succession, but it isn't THE ANTICHRIST. In
            other words, McMahon believes the office of popes to be
            antichristian, and that THE Antichrist will come from that
            succession...but he isn't here today, nor has he come in the past.
            >
            > "We will have to "see" who may be the "one" "giant"
            Antichrist, that man of sin, when he arises to the scene."
            >
            > All one has to do is look at this "puritan's" response to my 9
            questions above, and his absolute opposition to the very ones he
            claims as spiritual ancestors is immediately made known! Truly the
            wheat is being sifted from the tares, as, day after day, month after
            month, more and more who claim to be "reformed protestants" are
            showing themselves to be in bed with ROME, as they find all sorts of
            creative ways to relegate the antichrist's reign of terror to the
            past or the future, but never to the present.
            >
            > "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."
            >
            > They received not the love of the truth because they were sent
            strong delusion by God Himself. These are obviosuly reprobates who
            were fitted for destruction from the foundation of the world....for
            the Lord never UN-elects one of His elect to damn them. These false
            Christians -- tares among the wheat -- because they never received a
            love of the truth (a mark of being elect), believed a LIE.
            >
            > The "truth" that was not believed cannot refer to "rejecting
            the Gospel," as some believe. The topic of the chapter is not the
            Gospel, but the revealing of the man of sin. Therefore, the LIE
            that is believed is directly related to the revealing of the man of
            sin.
            >
            > Lord come quickly!
            >
            > Take care,
            > Keith
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: Theodore Letis
            > To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
            > Sent: 12/3/2004 5:06:48 PM
            > Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Site Update
            >
            >
            > Keith,
            >
            > what I find odd is that "conservative" (not liberal)
            Calvinists can't even accept it from Calvin himself in the
            Institutes--THE primary source of the Reformed Reformation. but yet
            they can accept Preterism from Sproul and others--a blatant heresy
            (partial or otherwise). Let's see...Calvin wrong; Sproul right!?
            >
            > Amongst confessional Lutherans I have never met one who did
            not toally agree with Luther on the Antichrist. Not one! Why is
            that? I think it is because the Reformed claim to be "Reformed...but
            always Reforming," so in some respects these Reformed are more like
            Rome: the faith keeps getting revised like Bill Gate's Microsoft
            Word, so that only the "latest" version is the correct version.
            Thanks God you have been led to keep these works available.
            >
            > Ted
            >
            > keith dotzler <kdotz@e...> wrote:
            > I appreciate that bro Ted. There are many more such works
            in my arsenal, which I wish to share with the brethren over the
            course of the coming years. I only wish those fancy Caligraphic old
            English fonts wouldn't have been used...because then I could scan
            them, rather than having to transcribe them by hand! ;-)
            >
            > Though it's time consuming to place such excerpts on the
            web, it's a very small price to pay....
            >
            > As a professing Christian (during my Arminian days), I was
            wholly ignorant of the existence of such works for over 11 years!
            >
            > Even after my eyes were opened to the Doctrines of Grace a
            couple years back, I had so-called "reformed Calvinists" telling me
            that eschatology was all but passed over by the Reformers and post
            reformers, and that belief in a pre-trib rapture and
            premillennialism were Biblically sound, and wholly compatible with
            CALVINISM and REFORMED PROTESTANISM!!! After all, you know the
            standard line used by those who think they're more intelligent and
            more in tune with the Spirit than the Reformers were: "they were
            only men."
            >
            > I have discovered, first-hand, that all who claim the name
            of "reformed Protestant," who say that the subject of Antichrist
            rarely came up before, during, or after the Reformation, are
            ignorantly speaking words without knowledge (to their shame).
            >
            > Having done the leg work necessary to acquire...
            > a.. the MANY treatises on Antichrist that circulated
            during the 16th and 17th centuries (Turretin, Beard, Bradshaw,
            Daneau, Deios, Garrett, Gwalther, Jones, Rainolds, Osiander, Sohn,
            Hall, Zwingli, Becon, Barnes, Downame, Whitaker, Tyndale, Luther,
            etc),
            > b.. as well as the NUMEROUS commentaries on the
            Revelation from the same era (Holland, Fulke, Pareus, Newton,
            Brightman, Mede, Junius, More, Durham, Dent, Cotton, Perkins,
            Cartwright, Bale),
            > c.. not to mention the 16th & 17th century commentaries
            on 2 Thessalonians (Tymme, Fergusson, Squire, Jewel, Manton,
            Bullinger, Fulke, and Cartwright),
            > ....I find it simply INCREDIBLE that so many,
            many "reformed" brethren could even muster up the THOUGHT that
            antichrist was a non-issue...let alone making those ignorant
            thoughts PUBLIC! How can such a vast library be missed?
            >
            > Sadly, multitudes who name the name of Christ have
            absolutely no idea that the testimony of the saints of the last 7+
            centuries has been preserved for us in various forms....all of which
            points the true Church of God to the identity of the man of sin and
            his harlot Church -- Mystery Babylon. These treasures are crassly
            cast aside and ignored by the intellectuals among us -- relegated to
            the "works of men" bin.
            >
            > Today's professing apostate Christian thinks it
            more "godly" to shout "give me the Bible and nothing else," than to
            examine the writings of our departed brethren, to see what they
            believed and WHY. Some of these pretenders then get positions in
            their local churches TEACHING others the false "truths" they
            received of the Spirit, while studying their Bible and nothing
            else. Then comes the day when one of his students asks him about
            the identity of the antichrist. The teacher, proud of the fact that
            he has his Bible and nothing else, proudly proclaims,
            >
            > "Why, we obviously can't know who he is, until he's
            revealed after the rapture!"
            >
            > But, says the student, the historic Church over the course
            of the last 7 centuries, with one voice, has proclaimed that the
            Pope of Rome is the Antichrist.
            >
            > "Well," says the teacher, "they were just men. You
            shouldn't put much stock in their commentaries and other writings.
            The Bible alone will give you the answers, through the guidance of
            the Holy Spirit."
            >
            > Well, says the student, first of all, aren't YOU a man?
            >
            > Secondly, if the Holy Spirit guides us into all truth, and
            if he has already guided the historic Church of the last 7 centuries
            into the truth about the Antichrist's identity, and if we now ignore
            that revelation and await our own, wouldn't we be rejecting the
            truth?
            >
            > Thirdly, of what use are teachers, preachers, evangelists,
            pastors, etc, if we aren't to LISTEN TO THEM?
            >
            >
            >
            > Take care,
            > Keith
            >
            >
            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: Theodore Letis
            > To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
            > Sent: 12/1/2004 10:09:29 PM
            > Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Site Update
            >
            >
            > What I attempted to say below was that I very much
            enjoyed the website noted by Keith below and am happy to see those
            important documents yet out there for all to read...for now.
            >
            > Ted
            >
            >
            > urces are out thre and still readable...for now...
            >
            > Ted
            >
            > keith dotzler <kdotz@e...> wrote:
            >
            > Friends,
            >
            > Our site has been updated.
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            http://www.geocities.com/ll_twoedged_sword_ll/main.html
            >
            >
            > In Christ,
            > Keith Dotzler
            > kdotz@e...
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > -------------------------------------------------------------------
            -
            > Do you Yahoo!?
            > The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
            >
            >
            >
            > -------------------------------------------------------------------
            ---
            > Do you Yahoo!?
            > All your favorites on one personal page - Try My Yahoo!
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > -------------------------------------------------------------------
            -------
            > Do you Yahoo!?
            > Jazz up your holiday email with celebrity designs. Learn
            more.
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > -------------------------------------------------------------------
            -----------
            > Do you Yahoo!?
            > All your favorites on one personal page - Try My Yahoo!
            > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
            > ADVERTISEMENT
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > -------------------------------------------------------------------
            -----------
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
            > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/covenantedreformationclub/
            >
            > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > covenantedreformationclub-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >
            > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
            of Service.
          • Cheryl
            It will be a grand day when the quality of our *practice* matches the quality of our profession. Cheryl ... From: Edgar A. Ibarra Jr.
            Message 5 of 14 , Dec 7, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              It will be a grand day when the quality of our *practice* matches the quality of our profession.
               
              Cheryl
              ----- Original Message -----
              Reformed/Presbyterian/Calvinsim is the most purest & faithful
              expression of Christianity...the doctrine...not necessarily always
              the adherents...
            • Keith Dotzler
              Amen bro Ted. I am simply amazed, and baffled at the same time, at the number of references that modern protestants make to contemporary authors -- to the
              Message 6 of 14 , Dec 8, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                Amen bro Ted. I am simply amazed, and baffled at the same time, at
                the number of references that modern "protestants" make to
                contemporary authors -- to the utter and complete negligence of the
                conclusions arrived at by the Reformers and Puritans -- when the
                subject of the Antichrist is discussed!

                You won't see them citing Turretin, Jewel, Tymme, Fergusson, Perkins,
                Brightman, Pareus, Fulke, or Cartwright as proudly as they cite
                Gentry and others...unless, of course, it's to quibble about
                some "problems with [their] exegesis."

                Take care, brother!

                Keith









                --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Theodore Letis
                <bucerian@y...> wrote:
                > Keith,
                >
                > You handled this perfectly. This is the rot that is coming out of
                PCA/OPC semianries, and from the Sproul/Packer pastor-graduates from
                these schools of the addle-minded. You nailed them justifiably by
                pointing out they are no more Puritan (or Reformed, for that matter)
                than are modern Methodists. But they are too ignorant to be able to
                blush when this is pointed out to them. The internet has done us much
                good, but that bad it has accomplished in turning knats in to
                draggons under the magnification of "attention-getting" from being
                someone in cyberspace, almost makes me wish for an earlier time, pre-
                internet "academics."
                >
                > Ted
                >
                > keith dotzler <kdotz@e...> wrote:
                > Bro Ted,
                >
                > You've said it all in that short post! Sadly, it is a rare
                occasion when one comes across a professed "protestant," who isn't a
                futurist or a preterist. In fact, outside of this list, I can count
                on one hand the number of truly Reformed Protestants that I've met AT
                PROTESTANT AND PURITAN DISCUSSION BOARDS....and I've been discussing
                this topic all over the web for around 3 years now!
                >
                > In case you weren't a member of this list when I made reference to
                Matt McMahon, founder of a website and discussion board called A
                Puritan's Mind, have a gander at the following. All of the citations
                come from members of his so-called "puritan" discussion board. In
                fact, they are all statements made by McMahon and his discussion
                board administrators...one and all professing to be of a puritan's
                mind...whatever that means in this day and age. What follows was
                originally formatted to be included as an appendix to my recent site
                update.
                >
                > Hold on to your hat....
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > I offer the following, from another who claims to be reformed and a
                Calvinist, yet opposes Calvin and the rest of the Reformers, as well
                as the very ones after whom he has named himself ("puritan sailor"),
                in denying the Pope to be the antichrist! —
                >
                > "Here again, you are assuming the Antichrist is the Pope. You have
                not yet proven that. Just because the Reformers thought so doesn't
                make it right. Please give me your exegetical grounds for your
                perspective....Just because martyrs may identify someone as the
                antichrist doesn't mean they are correct. I must rely in Scripture
                alone. So if you can't give me your exegesis then at least give me
                theirs." (emphasis added)
                >
                > Not only has this puritan pretender trampled upon the blood of
                every last Christian martyr who named the Pope as the antichrist, but
                the brother to whom that whole paragraph was directed has a website
                PACKED with the testimony of the saints through the ages, all of
                which was at this puritan pretender's fingertips, had he been so
                inclined to acquaint himself with the subject matter at hand, before
                publicly making a fool of himself. This so-called "puritan" pretends
                to be in search of a proper "exegesis" of Scripture regarding
                antichrist's identity, yet seems to be wholly oblivious to the fact
                that numerous works abounded during the Reformation era, and
                afterward, all of which prove the Pope of Rome to be that antichrist
                and man of sin foretold in Scripture, his false Church being Mystery
                Babylon. He was just a mouse-click away from that which he sought,
                yet still had the unmitigated gall to ask for exegesis that proved
                the Pope of Rome to be the Antichrist!
                >
                > How is one who throws around words like "exegesis" to be taken
                seriously, when he obviously hasn't educated himself in the works of
                those whom he claims as spiritual brethren, such as the Reformers and
                the Puritans? If he rejects THEIR exegesis of Revelation chapters 13
                and 17, or that of 2 Thessalonians chapter 2, what on earth, then,
                would suddenly cause him to accept the exegesis of the brother with
                whom he was having this discussion? Who can call themselves a
                Puritan or a Reformed Protestant, and REJECT ALL of what the
                Reformers and Puritans taught concerning the identities of THE
                Antichrist, THE man of sin, and Mystery Babylon?
                >
                > This so-called "puritan sailor" begs for exegesis...ANY
                exegesis...proving the Pope of Rome to be THE antichrist --, yet what
                do you suppose he did with it, when it was offered? The exegesis of
                one William Perkins (a true Puritan) was offered to this puritan
                pretender, in the form of an excerpt from An Excellent Sermon Plainly
                Proving That Rome is Babylon, and That Babylon is Fallen (1595),as
                was Francis Turretin's 7th Disputation, Whether It Can Be Proven the
                Pope of Rome is the Antichrist (circa 1661). How did the "puritan
                sailor" respond to the former?
                >
                > "Using Perkin's [sic] quote above, I find some flaws in exegesis."
                >
                > There you have it. Not only would this arrogant puritan pretender
                reject the exegesis of anyone and everyone who would claim the Pope
                to be the Antichrist, but he obviously isn't even familiar enough
                with the real Puritan, with whom he finds these so-called flaws in
                exegesis, to know that his last name is NOT Perkin! Strangely, he
                had nothing to say about Turretin's exegesis...probably because he
                didn't bother reading it.
                >
                > Here are some more ignorant proclamations from the puritan
                pretender:
                >
                > "The book of Revelation would have very little application to first
                century Christians if the Pope was the Antichrist simple [sic]
                because there was no Pope."
                >
                > "There is no disagreement that the Pope is antichristian. And,
                there's probably no disagreement that the Pope most likely embodied
                the greatest spirit of antichrist during the Reformation. But that is
                not the case anymore. The spirit of antichrist is much greater in
                scope than Roman Catholicism." (emphasis added)
                >
                >
                > And have a look at this gem, from a "reformed" pastor:
                >
                > "The Bible nowhere outright states that the Pope of Rome is the
                antichrist. The Bible is clear that there have been and will continue
                to be many antichrists, and while some will say that the Pope is an
                antichrist, declaring such is not a litmus test for orthodoxy."
                >
                >
                > Lastly, observe the following, which was the response I received
                from the very well-educated founder of a "Puritan" website. I asked
                him, "Who/what is the man of sin of 2 Thes 2?" Knowing his
                familiarity with Reformed doctrine, as well as how vast his personal
                library must be, knowing he owns the Reformation Bookshelf and
                Puritan Bookshelf CD sets from Still Waters Revival Books...62 CDs in
                all, I found his response to my simple question to be arrogant, high-
                minded, mind-blowing, and simply a slap in the face to those
                Reformers and Puritans who proclaimed truths that he, with this
                ridiculous answer, denies. Who does this "puritan" pseudo-scholar
                make the man of sin to be? Observe:
                >
                > "Antichristian government or pressures in the world."
                >
                > And, to make matters worse, he later told me that,
                >
                > "The Antichrist himself was not Pope Innocent the III, or Pope John
                Paul 1st. We will have to 'see' who may be the 'one' 'giant'
                Antichrist, that man of sin, when he arises to the scene." (emphasis
                added)
                >
                > This so-called "puritan" not only looks for the man of sin (whom he
                had just said was "antichristian government") to be an individual man
                (one "giant" Antichrist), but he also denies that the man of sin had
                already been on the scene more than 700 years ago, and looks for him
                to first come on the scene at some FUTURE DATE (as do the papists)!
                Thus, he outright denies what millions of ancient Christians,
                Reformers, Puritans, and post-reformers before him have ALL
                proclaimed (many to their deaths), viz., that the man of sin, the
                antichrist, the beast, was not to come at some point in the future,
                but was the one that was killing Christians, and was the one reigning
                IN THEIR MIDST, with his seat and harlot church both residing in
                Rome!
                >
                > The above men will quickly claim that they believe the papacy is
                antichrist, as did the founder, mentioned above, in an e-mail
                correspondence with me (see below), but notice how they word such an
                empty creedal statement. They make sure to leave out the article
                THE, and refer to the papacy as just "antichrist," "antichristian,"
                or "AN antichrist." They just can't bring their intellects down from
                out of the clouds to embrace that which was revelaed to millions of
                martyred brethren over the last millennium: the papacy is THE
                antichrist, THE man of sin, and THE beast from the sea!
                >
                > Here are some questions I put to the founder, via e-mail. His
                responses are in blue:
                > 1) Who/what is the beast that rose out of the sea, in Rev 13?
                Devil - the hand of the devil
                > 2) Who/what is the man of sin of 2 Thes 2? Antichristian
                government or pressures in the world
                > 3) Who/what is the little horn of Daniel 9? Antichrist government
                or pressures in the world
                > 4) Who/what is Mystery, Babylon the Great of Rev 17? Possibly
                the Roman Catholic Church (see WCF)
                > 5) Who/what is the beast that rose out of the earth, in Rev 13?
                Devil - the wisdom of the devil
                > 6) Who/what is the "let" of 2 Thes 2? "no one", then the
                Antichristian influences
                > 7) Who/what are the Locusts of Rev 9? The power and influences of
                hell over wicked men
                > 8) Who/what are the two witnesses of Rev 11? The church
                militant - the preaching of the word and sacraments
                > 9) What is the mark, name, and number of the beast, in Rev 13?
                Unregenerate influences against the church
                >
                >
                >
                > Notice his response to question #4. He implies the WCF could be
                right about Mystery Babylon's identity, but he himself won't be
                dogmatic about it! What's more, when a good friend of mine said the
                following to one of the administrators in a PRIVATE e-mail exchange,
                he was promptly banned from the discussion board!
                >
                > "The infallible Word of God states explicitly that if any man shall
                take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take
                away his part of the book of life....
                >
                > The official sanctioned website of the OPC has willfully and
                maliciously - not from ignorance - deleted the identity of the arch-
                enemy of Christ and His Church, thus re-inventing the true
                interpretation of the Revelation which Christ infallibly wills His
                Elect know and understand. Of course, you must know the PCA has done
                likewise."
                >
                >
                > Perkins and Turretin, to whom these men are particularly partial,
                must be rolling in their graves!
                >
                > One will search high and low on McMahon's website for any mention
                of the papal antichrist and his church, Mystery Babylon. I find this
                a STARTLING revelation, considering the fact that during the
                Reformation era, naming antichrist and his harlot church proceeded
                directly out of, and was a natural result of, preaching salvation by
                grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone...the two
                proclamations, combined, being the very justification for separating
                from the Church of Rome! How that founder can claim to have "a
                puritan's mind," yet keep the elect IN THE DARK as to THE
                antichrist's true identity is truly a mystery. To make matters
                worse, he allows preterists to openly posit their heresy at his so-
                called "puritan" board. As long as "Christ crucified" is the uniting
                mantra, all are welcome to insert their particular heresies without
                fear of chastisement or excommunication...as long as you don't pass
                judgment on a "reformed" Church that has expunged the identity of the
                man of
                > sin from the WCF!
                >
                > What that "puritan" founder IS, in fact, is a closet-futurist. He
                said the following to me, in the course of our e-mail "debate:"
                > "The office of the Antichrist is the papal succession. The
                Antichrist himself was not Pope Innocent the III, or Pope John Paul
                1st. We will have to "see" who may be the "one" "giant" Antichrist,
                that man of sin, when he arises to the scene. We can say that the
                line is Antichrist (and I do)."
                >
                > Notice his little deceptive play on words, as he tries to make me
                believe he is in agreement with the Reformers and Puritans through
                the ages, regarding the identity of the antichrist:
                >
                > "We can say that the line is Antichrist (and I do)."
                >
                > The line of popes are ANTICHRIST, and the OFFICE of the Antichrist
                IS the papal succession, but it isn't THE ANTICHRIST. In other
                words, McMahon believes the office of popes to be antichristian, and
                that THE Antichrist will come from that succession...but he isn't
                here today, nor has he come in the past.
                >
                > "We will have to "see" who may be the "one" "giant" Antichrist,
                that man of sin, when he arises to the scene."
                >
                > All one has to do is look at this "puritan's" response to my 9
                questions above, and his absolute opposition to the very ones he
                claims as spiritual ancestors is immediately made known! Truly the
                wheat is being sifted from the tares, as, day after day, month after
                month, more and more who claim to be "reformed protestants" are
                showing themselves to be in bed with ROME, as they find all sorts of
                creative ways to relegate the antichrist's reign of terror to the
                past or the future, but never to the present.
                >
                > "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."
                >
                >
                >
                > They received not the love of the truth because they were sent
                strong delusion by God Himself. These are obviosuly reprobates who
                were fitted for destruction from the foundation of the world....for
                the Lord never UN-elects one of His elect to damn them. These false
                Christians -- tares among the wheat -- because they never received a
                love of the truth (a mark of being elect), believed a LIE.
                >
                > The "truth" that was not believed cannot refer to "rejecting the
                Gospel," as some believe. The topic of the chapter is not the
                Gospel, but the revealing of the man of sin. Therefore, the LIE that
                is believed is directly related to the revealing of the man of sin.
                >
                >
                > Lord come quickly!
                >
                > Take care,
                > Keith
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > ----- Original Message -----
                > From: Theodore Letis
                > To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                > Sent: 12/3/2004 5:06:48 PM
                > Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Site Update
                >
                >
                > Keith,
                >
                > what I find odd is that "conservative" (not liberal) Calvinists
                can't even accept it from Calvin himself in the Institutes--THE
                primary source of the Reformed Reformation. but yet they can accept
                Preterism from Sproul and others--a blatant heresy (partial or
                otherwise). Let's see...Calvin wrong; Sproul right!?
                >
                > Amongst confessional Lutherans I have never met one who did not
                toally agree with Luther on the Antichrist. Not one! Why is that? I
                think it is because the Reformed claim to be "Reformed...but always
                Reforming," so in some respects these Reformed are more like Rome:
                the faith keeps getting revised like Bill Gate's Microsoft Word, so
                that only the "latest" version is the correct version. Thanks God you
                have been led to keep these works available.
                >
                > Ted
                >
                > keith dotzler <kdotz@e...> wrote:
                > I appreciate that bro Ted. There are many more such works in my
                arsenal, which I wish to share with the brethren over the course of
                the coming years. I only wish those fancy Caligraphic old English
                fonts wouldn't have been used...because then I could scan them,
                rather than having to transcribe them by hand! ;-)
                >
                > Though it's time consuming to place such excerpts on the web, it's
                a very small price to pay....
                >
                > As a professing Christian (during my Arminian days), I was wholly
                ignorant of the existence of such works for over 11 years!
                >
                > Even after my eyes were opened to the Doctrines of Grace a couple
                years back, I had so-called "reformed Calvinists" telling me that
                eschatology was all but passed over by the Reformers and post
                reformers, and that belief in a pre-trib rapture and premillennialism
                were Biblically sound, and wholly compatible with CALVINISM and
                REFORMED PROTESTANISM!!! After all, you know the standard line used
                by those who think they're more intelligent and more in tune with the
                Spirit than the Reformers were: "they were only men."
                >
                > I have discovered, first-hand, that all who claim the name
                of "reformed Protestant," who say that the subject of Antichrist
                rarely came up before, during, or after the Reformation, are
                ignorantly speaking words without knowledge (to their shame).
                >
                > Having done the leg work necessary to acquire...
                >
                > the MANY treatises on Antichrist that circulated during the 16th
                and 17th centuries (Turretin, Beard, Bradshaw, Daneau, Deios,
                Garrett, Gwalther, Jones, Rainolds, Osiander, Sohn, Hall, Zwingli,
                Becon, Barnes, Downame, Whitaker, Tyndale, Luther, etc),
                > as well as the NUMEROUS commentaries on the Revelation from the
                same era (Holland, Fulke, Pareus, Newton, Brightman, Mede, Junius,
                More, Durham, Dent, Cotton, Perkins, Cartwright, Bale),
                > not to mention the 16th & 17th century commentaries on 2
                Thessalonians (Tymme, Fergusson, Squire, Jewel, Manton, Bullinger,
                Fulke, and Cartwright),
                > ....I find it simply INCREDIBLE that so many, many "reformed"
                brethren could even muster up the THOUGHT that antichrist was a non-
                issue...let alone making those ignorant thoughts PUBLIC! How can
                such a vast library be missed?
                >
                > Sadly, multitudes who name the name of Christ have absolutely no
                idea that the testimony of the saints of the last 7+ centuries has
                been preserved for us in various forms....all of which points the
                true Church of God to the identity of the man of sin and his harlot
                Church -- Mystery Babylon. These treasures are crassly cast aside
                and ignored by the intellectuals among us -- relegated to the "works
                of men" bin.
                >
                > Today's professing apostate Christian thinks it more "godly" to
                shout "give me the Bible and nothing else," than to examine the
                writings of our departed brethren, to see what they believed and
                WHY. Some of these pretenders then get positions in their local
                churches TEACHING others the false "truths" they received of the
                Spirit, while studying their Bible and nothing else. Then comes the
                day when one of his students asks him about the identity of the
                antichrist. The teacher, proud of the fact that he has his Bible and
                nothing else, proudly proclaims,
                >
                > "Why, we obviously can't know who he is, until he's revealed after
                the rapture!"
                >
                > But, says the student, the historic Church over the course of the
                last 7 centuries, with one voice, has proclaimed that the Pope of
                Rome is the Antichrist.
                >
                > "Well," says the teacher, "they were just men. You shouldn't put
                much stock in their commentaries and other writings. The Bible alone
                will give you the answers, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit."
                >
                > Well, says the student, first of all, aren't YOU a man?
                >
                > Secondly, if the Holy Spirit guides us into all truth, and if he
                has already guided the historic Church of the last 7 centuries into
                the truth about the Antichrist's identity, and if we now ignore that
                revelation and await our own, wouldn't we be rejecting the truth?
                >
                > Thirdly, of what use are teachers, preachers, evangelists, pastors,
                etc, if we aren't to LISTEN TO THEM?
                >
                >
                >
                > Take care,
                > Keith
                >
                >
                >
                > ----- Original Message -----
                > From: Theodore Letis
                > To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                > Sent: 12/1/2004 10:09:29 PM
                > Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Site Update
                >
                >
                > What I attempted to say below was that I very much enjoyed the
                website noted by Keith below and am happy to see those important
                documents yet out there for all to read...for now.
                >
                > Ted
                >
                >
                > urces are out thre and still readable...for now...
                >
                > Ted
                >
                > keith dotzler <kdotz@e...> wrote:
                >
                > Friends,
                >
                > Our site has been updated.
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > http://www.geocities.com/ll_twoedged_sword_ll/main.html
                >
                >
                > In Christ,
                > Keith Dotzler
                > kdotz@e...
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > ---------------------------------
                > Do you Yahoo!?
                > The all-new My Yahoo! – Get yours free!
                >
                >
                > ---------------------------------
                > Do you Yahoo!?
                > All your favorites on one personal page – Try My Yahoo!
                >
                >
                >
                > ---------------------------------
                > Do you Yahoo!?
                > Jazz up your holiday email with celebrity designs. Learn more.
                >
                > Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
                >
                >
                > ---------------------------------
                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                > To visit your group on the web, go to:
                > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/covenantedreformationclub/
                >
                > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                > covenantedreformationclub-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                >
                > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                Service.
                >
                >
                >
                > ---------------------------------
                > Do you Yahoo!?
                > All your favorites on one personal page – Try My Yahoo!
              • Theodore Letis
                My Covenanter brethren (Parnell in particular): I am embarrassed to have to call on you but my two libraries are in storage--one in Grand Rapids, the other in
                Message 7 of 14 , Dec 21, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  My Covenanter brethren (Parnell in particular):
                   
                  I am embarrassed to have to call on you but my two libraries are in storage--one in Grand Rapids, the other in Edinburgh--and I need a quick answer to a historical question:
                   
                  What was the name of the papal encyclical written in the sixteenth century claiming all lands discovered in the New World to be under the political and spiritual authority of the Roman Church? Also the date, where and English edition of the text can be found, and the author (which Pope). Many thanks for your help on this.
                   
                  --Theodore P. Letis

                  Theodore Letis <bucerian@...> wrote:
                  Keith,
                   
                  You handled this perfectly. This is the rot that is coming out of PCA/OPC semianries, and from the Sproul/Packer pastor-graduates from these schools of the addle-minded. You nailed them justifiably by pointing out they are no more Puritan (or Reformed, for that matter) than are modern Methodists. But they are too ignorant to be able to blush when this is pointed out to them. The internet has done us much good, but that bad it has accomplished in turning knats in to draggons under the magnification of "attention-getting" from being someone in cyberspace, almost makes me wish for an earlier time, pre-internet "academics."
                   
                  Ted

                  keith dotzler <kdotz@...> wrote:
                  Bro Ted,
                   
                  You've said it all in that short post!  Sadly, it is a rare occasion when one comes across a professed "protestant," who isn't a futurist or a preterist.  In fact, outside of this list, I can count on one hand the number of truly Reformed Protestants that I've met AT PROTESTANT AND PURITAN DISCUSSION BOARDS....and I've been discussing this topic all over the web for around 3 years now!
                   
                  In case you weren't a member of this list when I made reference to Matt McMahon, founder of a website and discussion board called A Puritan's Mind, have a gander at the following.  All of the citations come from members of his so-called "puritan" discussion board.  In fact, they are all statements made by McMahon and his discussion board administrators...one and all professing to be of a puritan's mind...whatever that means in this day and age.  What follows was originally formatted to be included as an appendix to my recent site update.
                   
                  Hold on to your hat....
                   
                   
                       

                  I offer the following, from another who claims to be reformed and a Calvinist, yet opposes Calvin and the rest of the Reformers, as well as the very ones after whom he has named himself ("puritan sailor"), in denying the Pope to be the antichrist!

                  �Here again, you are assuming the Antichrist is the Pope. You have not yet proven that. Just because the Reformers thought so doesn't make it right. Please give me your exegetical grounds for your perspective....Just because martyrs may identify someone as the antichrist doesn't mean they are correct. I must rely in Scripture alone. So if you can't give me your exegesis then at least give me theirs.�  (emphasis added)

                  Not only has this puritan pretender trampled upon the blood of every last Christian martyr who named the Pope as the antichrist, but the brother to whom that whole paragraph was directed has a website PACKED with the testimony of the saints through the ages, all of which was at this puritan pretender's fingertips, had he been so inclined to acquaint himself with the subject matter at hand, before publicly making a fool of himself.  This so-called "puritan" pretends to be in search of a proper "exegesis" of Scripture regarding antichrist's identity, yet seems to be wholly oblivious to the fact that numerous works abounded during the Reformation era, and afterward, all of which prove the Pope of Rome to be that antichrist and man of sin foretold in Scripture, his false Church being Mystery Babylon.  He was just a mouse-click away from that which he sought, yet still had the unmitigated gall to ask for exegesis that proved the Pope of Rome to be the Antichrist! 

                  How is one who throws around words like "exegesis" to be taken seriously, when he obviously hasn't educated himself in the works of those whom he claims as spiritual brethren, such as the Reformers and the Puritans?  If he rejects THEIR exegesis of Revelation chapters 13 and 17, or that of 2 Thessalonians chapter 2, what on earth, then, would suddenly cause him to accept the exegesis of the brother with whom he was having this discussion?  Who can call themselves a Puritan or a Reformed Protestant, and REJECT ALL of what the Reformers and Puritans taught concerning the identities of THE Antichrist, THE man of sin, and Mystery Babylon? 

                  This so-called "puritan sailor" begs for exegesis...ANY exegesis...proving the Pope of Rome to be THE antichrist --, yet what do you suppose he did with it, when it was offered?  The exegesis of one William Perkins (a true Puritan) was offered to this puritan pretender, in the form of an excerpt from An Excellent Sermon Plainly Proving That Rome is Babylon, and That Babylon is Fallen (1595),as was Francis Turretin's 7th Disputation, Whether It Can Be Proven the Pope of Rome is the Antichrist (circa 1661).  How did the "puritan sailor" respond to the former?

                  "Using Perkin's [sic] quote above, I find some flaws in exegesis."

                  There you have it.  Not only would this arrogant puritan pretender reject the exegesis of anyone and everyone who would claim the Pope to be the Antichrist, but he obviously isn't even familiar enough with the real Puritan, with whom he finds these so-called flaws in exegesis, to know that his last name is NOT Perkin!   Strangely, he had nothing to say about Turretin's exegesis...probably because he didn't bother reading it.

                  Here are some more ignorant proclamations from the puritan pretender:

                  The book of Revelation would have very little application to first century Christians if the Pope was the Antichrist simple [sic] because there was no Pope.

                  There is no disagreement that the Pope is antichristian. And, there's probably no disagreement that the Pope most likely embodied the greatest spirit of antichrist during the Reformation. But that is not the case anymore. The spirit of antichrist is much greater in scope than Roman Catholicism.�  (emphasis added)
                   

                  And have a look at this gem, from a "reformed" pastor:

                  �The Bible nowhere outright states that the Pope of Rome is the antichrist. The Bible is clear that there have been and will continue to be many antichrists, and while some will say that the Pope is an antichrist, declaring such is not a litmus test for orthodoxy.�
                   

                  Lastly, observe the following, which was the response I received from the very well-educated founder of a "Puritan" website. I asked him, �Who/what is the man of sin of 2 Thes 2?�  Knowing his familiarity with Reformed doctrine, as well as how vast his personal library must be, knowing he owns the Reformation Bookshelf and Puritan Bookshelf CD sets from Still Waters Revival Books...62 CDs in all, I found his response to my simple question to be arrogant, high-minded, mind-blowing, and simply a slap in the face to those Reformers and Puritans who proclaimed truths that he, with this ridiculous answer, denies.  Who does this "puritan" pseudo-scholar make the man of sin to be?  Observe: 

                  �Antichristian government or pressures in the world. 

                  And, to make matters worse, he later told me that,

                  �The Antichrist himself was not Pope Innocent the III, or Pope John Paul 1st.  We will have to 'see' who may be the 'one' 'giant' Antichrist, that man of sin, when he arises to the scene. (emphasis added)

                  This so-called "puritan" not only looks for the man of sin (whom he had just said was "antichristian government") to be an individual man (one "giant" Antichrist), but he also denies that the man of sin had already been on the scene more than 700 years ago, and looks for him to first come on the scene at some FUTURE DATE (as do the papists)!  Thus, he outright denies what millions of ancient Christians, Reformers, Puritans, and post-reformers before him have ALL proclaimed (many to their deaths), viz., that the man of sin, the antichrist, the beast, was not to come at some point in the future, but was the one that was killing Christians, and was the one reigning IN THEIR MIDST, with his seat and harlot church both residing in Rome! 

                  The above men will quickly claim that they believe the papacy is antichrist, as did the founder, mentioned above, in an e-mail correspondence with me (see below), but notice how they word such an empty creedal statement.  They make sure to leave out the article THE, and refer to the papacy as just "antichrist," "antichristian," or "AN antichrist."  They just can't bring their intellects down from out of the clouds to embrace that which was revelaed to millions of martyred brethren over the last millennium:  the papacy is THE antichrist, THE man of sin, and THE beast from the sea! 

                  Here are some questions I put to the founder, via e-mail.  His responses are in blue:

                  1)  Who/what is the beast that rose out of the sea, in Rev 13?  Devil - the hand of the devil
                  2)  Who/what is the man of sin of 2 Thes 2?  Antichristian government or pressures in the world
                  3)  Who/what is the little horn of Daniel 9?  Antichrist government or pressures in the world
                  4)  Who/what is Mystery, Babylon the Great of Rev 17?   Possibly the Roman Catholic Church (see WCF)
                  5)  Who/what is the beast that rose out of the earth, in Rev 13?   Devil - the wisdom of the devil
                  6)  Who/what is the "let" of 2 Thes 2?  "no one", then the Antichristian influences
                  7)  Who/what are the Locusts of Rev 9?  The power and influences of hell over wicked men
                  8)  Who/what are the two witnesses of Rev 11?   The church militant - the preaching of the word and sacraments
                  9)  What is the mark, name, and number of the beast, in Rev 13?  Unregenerate influences against the church
                   
                   
                  Notice his response to question #4.  He implies the WCF could be right about Mystery Babylon's identity, but he himself won't be dogmatic about it!  What's more, when a good friend of mine said the following to one of the administrators in a PRIVATE e-mail exchange, he was promptly banned from the discussion board!
                   
                  "The infallible Word of God states explicitly that if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part of the book of life....
                   
                  The official sanctioned website of the OPC has willfully and maliciously - not from ignorance - deleted the identity of the arch-enemy of Christ and His Church, thus re-inventing the true interpretation of the Revelation which Christ infallibly wills His Elect know and understand. Of course, you must know the PCA has done likewise."
                   
                  Perkins and Turretin, to whom these men are particularly partial, must be rolling in their graves!
                   
                  One will search high and low on McMahon's website for any mention of the papal antichrist and his church, Mystery Babylon.  I find this a STARTLING revelation, considering the fact that during the Reformation era, naming antichrist and his harlot church proceeded directly out of, and was a natural result of, preaching salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone...the two proclamations, combined, being the very justification for separating from the Church of Rome!  How that founder can claim to have "a puritan's mind," yet keep the elect IN THE DARK as to THE antichrist's true identity is truly a mystery.  To make matters worse, he allows preterists to openly posit their heresy at his so-called "puritan" board.  As long as "Christ crucified" is the uniting mantra, all are welcome to insert their particular heresies without fear of chastisement or excommunication...as long as you don't pass judgment on a "reformed" Church that has expunged the identity of the man of sin from the WCF! 
                   
                  What that "puritan" founder IS, in fact, is a closet-futurist.  He said the following to me, in the course of our e-mail "debate:"
                  "The office of the Antichrist is the papal succession.  The Antichrist himself was not Pope Innocent the III, or Pope John Paul 1st.  We will have to "see" who may be the "one" "giant" Antichrist, that man of sin, when he arises to the scene.  We can say that the line is Antichrist (and I do)." 
                   
                  Notice his little deceptive play on words, as he tries to make me believe he is in agreement with the Reformers and Puritans through the ages, regarding the identity of the antichrist: 
                   
                  "We can say that the line is Antichrist (and I do)." 
                   
                  The line of popes are ANTICHRIST, and the OFFICE of the Antichrist IS the papal succession, but it isn't THE ANTICHRIST.  In other words, McMahon believes the office of popes to be antichristian, and that THE Antichrist will come from that succession...but he isn't here today, nor has he come in the past. 
                   
                  "We will have to "see" who may be the "one" "giant" Antichrist, that man of sin, when he arises to the scene."
                   
                  All one has to do is look at this "puritan's" response to my 9 questions above, and his absolute opposition to the very ones he claims as spiritual ancestors is immediately made known!  Truly the wheat is being sifted from the tares, as, day after day, month after month, more and more who claim to be "reformed protestants" are showing themselves to be in bed with ROME, as they find all sorts of creative ways to relegate the antichrist's reign of terror to the past or the future, but never to the present.  
                   
                  "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."
                   
                  They received not the love of the truth because they were sent strong delusion by God Himself.  These are obviosuly reprobates who were fitted for destruction from the foundation of the world....for the Lord never UN-elects one of His elect to damn them.  These false Christians -- tares among the wheat -- because they never received a love of the truth (a mark of being elect), believed a LIE.
                   
                  The "truth" that was not believed cannot refer to "rejecting the Gospel," as some believe.  The topic of the chapter is not the Gospel, but the revealing of the man of sin.  Therefore, the LIE that is believed is directly related to the revealing of the man of sin.
                   
                  Lord come quickly!
                   
                  Take care,
                  Keith
                   
                   
                   
                   
                  ----- Original Message -----
                  Sent: 12/3/2004 5:06:48 PM
                  Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Site Update

                  Keith,
                   
                  what I find odd is that "conservative" (not liberal) Calvinists can't even accept it from Calvin himself in the Institutes--THE primary source of the Reformed Reformation. but yet they can accept Preterism from Sproul and others--a blatant heresy (partial or otherwise). Let's see...Calvin wrong; Sproul right!? 
                   
                  Amongst confessional Lutherans I have never met one who did not toally agree with Luther on the Antichrist. Not one! Why is that? I think it is because the Reformed claim to be "Reformed...but always Reforming," so in some respects these Reformed are more like Rome: the faith keeps getting revised like Bill Gate's Microsoft Word, so that only the "latest" version is the correct version. Thanks God you have been led to keep these works available.
                   
                  Ted

                  keith dotzler <kdotz@...> wrote:
                  I appreciate that bro Ted.  There are many more such works in my arsenal, which I wish to share with the brethren over the course of the coming years.  I only wish those fancy Caligraphic old English fonts wouldn't have been used...because then I could scan them, rather than having to transcribe them by hand!    ;-)
                   
                  Though it's time consuming to place such excerpts on the web, it's a very small price to pay....
                   
                  As a professing Christian (during my Arminian days), I was wholly ignorant of the existence of such works for over 11 years! 
                   
                  Even after my eyes were opened to the Doctrines of Grace a couple years back, I had so-called "reformed Calvinists" telling me that eschatology was all but passed over by the Reformers and post reformers, and that belief in a pre-trib rapture and premillennialism were Biblically sound, and wholly compatible with CALVINISM and REFORMED PROTESTANISM!!!  After all, you know the standard line used by those who think they're more intelligent and more in tune with the Spirit than the Reformers were: "they were only men."
                   
                  I have discovered, first-hand, that all who claim the name of "reformed Protestant," who say that the subject of Antichrist rarely came up before, during, or after the Reformation, are ignorantly speaking words without knowledge (to their shame).
                   
                  Having done the leg work necessary to acquire...
                  • the MANY treatises on Antichrist that circulated during the 16th and 17th centuries (Turretin, Beard, Bradshaw, Daneau, Deios, Garrett, Gwalther, Jones, Rainolds, Osiander, Sohn, Hall, Zwingli, Becon, Barnes, Downame, Whitaker, Tyndale, Luther, etc),
                  • as well as the NUMEROUS commentaries on the Revelation from the same era (Holland, Fulke, Pareus, Newton, Brightman, Mede, Junius, More, Durham, Dent, Cotton, Perkins, Cartwright, Bale),
                  • not to mention the 16th & 17th century commentaries on 2 Thessalonians (Tymme, Fergusson, Squire, Jewel, Manton, Bullinger, Fulke, and Cartwright), 
                  ....I find it simply INCREDIBLE that so many, many "reformed" brethren could even muster up the THOUGHT that antichrist was a non-issue...let alone making those ignorant thoughts PUBLIC!  How can such a vast library be missed?
                   
                  Sadly, multitudes who name the name of Christ have absolutely no idea that the testimony of the saints of the last 7+ centuries has been preserved for us in various forms....all of which points the true Church of God to the identity of the man of sin and his harlot Church -- Mystery Babylon.  These treasures are crassly cast aside and ignored by the intellectuals among us -- relegated to the "works of men" bin. 
                   
                  Today's professing apostate Christian thinks it more "godly" to shout "give me the Bible and nothing else," than to examine the writings of our departed brethren, to see what they believed and WHY.   Some of these pretenders then get positions in their local churches TEACHING others the false "truths" they received of the Spirit, while studying their Bible and nothing else.   Then comes the day when one of his students asks him about the identity of the antichrist.  The teacher, proud of the fact that he has his Bible and nothing else, proudly proclaims,
                   
                  "Why, we obviously can't know who he is, until he's revealed after the rapture!"     
                   
                  But, says the student, the historic Church over the course of the last 7 centuries, with one voice, has proclaimed that the Pope of Rome is the Antichrist. 
                   
                  "Well," says the teacher, "they were just men.  You shouldn't put much stock in their commentaries and other writings.  The Bible alone will give you the answers, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit." 
                   
                  Well, says the student, first of all, aren't YOU a man? 
                   
                  Secondly, if the Holy Spirit guides us into all truth, and if he has already guided the historic Church of the last 7 centuries into the truth about the Antichrist's identity, and if we now ignore that revelation and await our own, wouldn't we be rejecting the truth? 
                   
                  Thirdly, of what use are teachers, preachers, evangelists, pastors, etc, if we aren't to LISTEN TO THEM? 
                   
                   
                   
                  Take care,
                  Keith 
                   
                   
                  ----- Original Message -----
                  Sent: 12/1/2004 10:09:29 PM
                  Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Site Update

                  What I attempted to say below was that I very much enjoyed the website noted by Keith below and am happy to see those important documents yet out there for all to read...for now.
                   
                  Ted

                  urces are out thre and still readable...for now...
                   
                  Ted

                  keith dotzler <kdotz@...> wrote:

                  Friends,
                   
                  Our site has been updated.  
                   
                   
                   
                   
                   
                  In Christ,
                  Keith Dotzler
                   



                  Do you Yahoo!?
                  The all-new My Yahoo! � Get yours free!


                  Do you Yahoo!?
                  All your favorites on one personal page � Try My Yahoo!



                  Do you Yahoo!?
                  Jazz up your holiday email with celebrity designs. Learn more.



                  Do you Yahoo!?
                  All your favorites on one personal page � Try My Yahoo!


                  Do you Yahoo!?
                  All your favorites on one personal page � Try My Yahoo!
                • keith dotzler
                  Friends, The following update can be found on our home page: In Christ, Keith Dotzler http://thebeastunmasked.com
                  Message 8 of 14 , May 12, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment

                     
                    Friends,
                     
                    The following update can be found on our home page:
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                    In Christ,
                    Keith Dotzler
                     

                  • Edgar A. Ibarra Jr.
                    Um, it s blank... ;-)
                    Message 9 of 14 , May 12, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Um, it's blank...

                      ;-)

                      --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "keith dotzler"
                      <kdotz@e...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Friends,
                      >
                      > The following update can be found on our home page:
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > In Christ,
                      > Keith Dotzler
                      > http://thebeastunmasked.com
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.