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

Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Site Update

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 14 , Dec 6, 2004
      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 2 of 14 , Dec 6, 2004
        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 3 of 14 , Dec 7, 2004
          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 4 of 14 , Dec 8, 2004
            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 5 of 14 , Dec 21, 2004
              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 6 of 14 , May 12 5:41 PM

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

              • Edgar A. Ibarra Jr.
                Um, it s blank... ;-)
                Message 7 of 14 , May 12 6:37 PM
                  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.