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

Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Site Update

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 14 , Dec 7, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      It will be a grand day when the quality of our *practice* matches the quality of our profession.
       
      Cheryl
      ----- Original Message -----
      Reformed/Presbyterian/Calvinsim is the most purest & faithful
      expression of Christianity...the doctrine...not necessarily always
      the adherents...
    • Keith Dotzler
      Amen bro Ted. I am simply amazed, and baffled at the same time, at the number of references that modern protestants make to contemporary authors -- to the
      Message 2 of 14 , Dec 8, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Amen bro Ted. I am simply amazed, and baffled at the same time, at
        the number of references that modern "protestants" make to
        contemporary authors -- to the utter and complete negligence of the
        conclusions arrived at by the Reformers and Puritans -- when the
        subject of the Antichrist is discussed!

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

        Take care, brother!

        Keith









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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

          Here are some more ignorant proclamations from the puritan pretender:

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

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

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

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

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

          �Antichristian government or pressures in the world. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

          keith dotzler <kdotz@...> wrote:

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



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


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



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



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


          Do you Yahoo!?
          All your favorites on one personal page � Try My Yahoo!
        • keith dotzler
          Friends, The following update can be found on our home page: In Christ, Keith Dotzler http://thebeastunmasked.com
          Message 4 of 14 , May 12, 2005
          • 0 Attachment

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

          • Edgar A. Ibarra Jr.
            Um, it s blank... ;-)
            Message 5 of 14 , May 12, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Um, it's blank...

              ;-)

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