Yet Another “End Times” Prophecy Fulfilled in Rome

I grow weary of futurism. The world’s going to end. The Antichrist is coming. The tribulation is coming. Watch out for technology and microchips and UPC codes and blah, blah, blah. This all seems to be a modern form of Gnosticism. There’s a secret “code” found within the Bible and especially the book of the Revelation that, if deciphered, will tell you everything that will happen in the future. These sorts, who pride themselves on “literal” renderings of scripture sure don’t prefer “straight forward” ones. I’d like to know where John ever said in his Revelation that these things will be taking place on some far-future time irrelevant to the original readers of the letter. Actually, irrelevant for another two or three thousand years. At any rate, making Bible prophecy fit into a completely imagined futuristic world scenario is not only easy but very sensational. It makes money. Kim Riddlebarger is an excellent Amillenial theologian. Over on his blog he describes the popular passage of Revelation 13:13-15 that is often taken to mean the future “Antichrist” will use false miracles to set up his future rule. Riddlebarger quotes Eusebius, who recounted an event in Rome during his time:

In his famous Church History, Eusebius describes the following scene during the reign of Maximin Daia (who ruled the eastern portion of the Roman empire from A.D. 308-313), and his lackey Theotecnus (which, ironically means “child of God” in Greek) and who was the city comptroller of Antioch.  Eusebius recounts the following in Book 9.5:

“Time and time again this man [Theotecnus] engaged in hostilities against us, trying every means to hunt our people out of hiding as if they were thieving villains, using every subterfuge to slander and accuse us, and even causing death to countless numbers.  Finally, with illusions and sorceries, he erected a statue of Zeus [like the one in Olympus, pictured above] as a god of friendship, and after devising demonic rites, initiations, and repulsive purifications for it, he displayed his magic even in the emperor’s presence through whatever oracular utterances he pleased. . .”

Eusebius goes on to describe the fall of Maximin and the arrest of Theotecnus after Constantine’s rise to power:

“Justice also summoned Theotecnus, determined that what he did to the Christians should never be forgotten.  After he set up the idol at Antioch, he seemed to enjoy great success and indeed, was awarded a governorship by Maximin. . . . When, under torture, they [Theotecnus] revealed that the entire mystery [the oracle from Zeus] was a deception contrived by Theotecnus” [Book 9.11].”

Eusebius’ account seems to indicate that the priests of the imperial cult were able to deceive even emperors through the use of fake “oracles from Zeus.”  Seems like ventriloquism was at least one of the modes by which the image of the beast (in this case, the statue of Zeus) was made to seem alive and perform deceptive signs and wonders.  And this about the time of Constantine’s supposed conversion in A.D. 312.

Yet another reason to see that such prophecy in the Revelation (and the rest of the Bible, for that matter) isn’t designated to some singular, catastrophic event of the future, but is a description of the forces at work behind the scenes in this interadvental period (the millennial reign). Satan, the Dragon, is always at work. He is bound now, to an extent. Christ observed him falling from his previous place of power. Rather than taking direct control of his people (the sinful, the wicked), he must use his lackey, the Beast, the spirit of “Antichrist”, to gather his armies how he may. This isn’t something designated to a future event only. It IS a future event, it WAS a past event, and it will always BE an event until Satan is released before Christ comes. Just because the Beast is gathering power in some way during our present age does not mean it is the end. Don’t shun responsibility. It may not be the end. Fight for what is right. The people of God must do what we can to beat back the Beast when he comes, whatever form he manifests in (usually governments). We owe it to ourselves – as the Church – and to everyone else – as Mankind. It ain’t over till it’s over.

Quick Thought – When high ideals come down to earth

‘Tis the season for many a sentiment. Some of these sentiments include ideas such as: giving is better than receiving, people become so selfish around Christmas time, the holidays are about family and not presents, etc. How many of you have thought about these things? How many of you turn around and hope you got that TV for Christmas afterward? Or give huge, ridiculous gifts hoping you will be showered with love, affection, and thanks? Be honest now.

Of course this isn’t just Christmas. We criticize fat Americans for eating fast food and being lazy all the time, then go to McDonald’s the next day and sit around watching TV all afternoon. We talk of freedom at all costs, then throw away our own in exchange for government grants. I can talk up my libertarian ideals of full freedom from government in my personal affairs, then file a Board of Governors Fee Waiver so I don’t have to pay for classes – because it’s convenient.

But what’s so wrong with this push and pull between the ideal and the practical, the heavenly and the earthly, the spiritual and the physical? As practical, physical beinsg, it is impossible for us to embody any non-pysical or spiritual archetypal ideal within the demension of our temporal existence. Therefore, in life it is the practical, the pragmatic that makes the most sense and is often what ends up being some of our best decisions.

So do we do away with our ideals? Remember, as humans we are constantly stradling the fence between animal and spiritual beings. This delicate balance is often broken at the expense of neglecting one half of our nature. However, once our focus becomes placed on the physical and temporal, we easily fall to the animal – beings who seek to merely exist, to fulfill evolutionary processes and die without ordeal. And again, if we shun the physical, as the aescetics, we cease our duties as the human, physical beings we were created to be.

I think our balance is best maintained by this push and pull – by our striving for the high and lofty mountain of ideals our spiritual nature and collective consciousness has provided for us – but all along keeping a watchful eye on the ground in front of us. Our ideals do not always help us with the decisions we must make in the here and now, but to remember them always and to never cease to strive for them is what keeps in the right direction – keeps the animal and spiritual in balance – and allows us to be the true sort of being that a human is meant to be. It is Christ allowing the disciples to pick corn on the Sabbath. It is an eternal, untouchable, unknowable God being manifest in human form with all like passions and limitations inherent in the race. We are all a Pyche of the sort, and our fulfillment is met by becoming the bridge between the archetype and the reality, between creation and eternal existance, between what is and what always has been.

No, I do not think this appearent contradiction is bad. As long as we do not forget the mountain nor neglect the road, it is what makes us the unique existance that we call humanity.

My School Essays

I’ve decided to make my Google Docs folder containing my midterm, final, and semester projects from this semester available for viewing. Here’s the link if you so wish to read them. Some are pretty good, some not so good, and some I probably shouldn’t have made public

Samsung Moment – Underrated.

I’m a proud owner. However, I’m quite irked by the over-emphasized publicity given to what are really lesser, more underpowered phones. I’m sure you love your Hero. But I’m here to break the news to you that it’s not more popular than the Moment because it’s better. I can make a piece of Al Paca feces popular by unabashedly running a commerical where 5-7 celebrities pass it around to each other like it’s the coolest thing in the world. And let’s not get started on that fruity phone that’s really just a glorified toy *ducks and dodges the flung, rotten apples.

All slander aside, the Samsung Moment is really a competetor, unbeknownst to many people (the kind who rely on Bono to tell them what a good electronic gadget is. [Sorry, I can't help myself {notice the proper internal paranthetical notation tree}]). There are many features of this phone that rank superior to the Droid and the other competetors of it’s class.

Keyboard

The keyboard is the first noticeable reason. In this, it trumps the Droid, whose solid keyboard leaves much to be desired from its very cramped style. I would have to say, as far as a smartphone device that may compare to or beat the Moment’s QWERTY (that’s always fun to type), the only phone on the market today that may viably do so would be the HTC Touch Pro 2, if you’re a fan of WinMo. The keys on the Moment do seem to have a bit of an odd configuration at first, not to mention that you’ll notice the keys seem to be almost flush with the platform they rest in. However, these only really appear to be nusances, and the keyboard, in practice, turns out to be very easy to use and can turn out some fast typing for very long documents (I’m writing this on the Moment, and I might have backspaced twice at the most due to typographical error – and I’m typing pretty fast).

Display

Aside from the keyboard is the display. It’s not near up to the resolution of the Droid or the TP2, but it’s AMOLED, a very bright and very high quality screen. I’ve long been a fan of Samsung’s screens on all the devices I’ve owned from them. Most people don’t realize this aspect of Samsung – their displays are always top notch. Yes, I’d like a high resolution that’s found on the Droid and TP2 (Twice the resolution, really), but the AMOLED on the Moment surprised me back when I was looking at phones. Honestly, I haven’t run into any limitations of clarity that I’ve really noticed. So if the Droid can be called supierior to the Moment in any way, it would be the screen resolution.

Processor

Now, I realize all those Snapdragon phones are comming out. But as far as the comming lineup of phones is concerned, the Moment is going to be the fastest of the horizontal slide out QWERTYs (still fun to type) for the next year or so. It’s ARM-11 800 MHz processor makes it the fastest phone this year. And the speed difference is noticeable.

Video

I honestly can’t tell you about this in the Droid, but the Hero definitely needs to step back. The Moment has out-of-the-box DivX AVI support. And it runs flawlessly. This places its advantaged squarely over the iPhone and many other devices that are limited in their video encoding options. No hasseling with long hours of video conversions to mp4 – just play the files as is.

Form Factor

This is a divided opinion with the Moment. Personally, I think the Droid just looks plain weird. I don’t like phones that are super slim and small. Especially when it comes to a QWERTY (yup), a thicker, larger profile makes typing that much easier. I like the form factor of the Moment. However, I do admit that the best form factor for a phone on the market currently would be the Touch Pro 2. Not the iPhone. Honestly, I think it’s ugly. I have no attraction whatsoever to the “Apple look.”

More Keyboard

Yes, I used this topic once already. But don’t worry, I played a Trainer card that lets me pull from the discard pile. But I’d like to mention the advantage of full QWERTY (whoo!) physical keyboards (yes, I’m going there) over their touch screen, soft keyboard counterparts. I know you can type superfast on your iPhone. But if I spent as much time on a QWERTY as you do on your iPhone, I can type twice as fast as you. Mainly, this comes from a far better accuracy rate and, very importantly, on a good keyboard, all symbols, numbers, and letters are right in front of you. It’s more accurate and allows you to type fasterwith less mistakes, plain and simple. As an added bonus, you don’t loose screen real estate as you type. I know it’s a personal decision, but I think many out there who have been brainwashed with the “soft keyboard is cool” marketing should give the hardware types a try.

Sprint and Android

These two speak for themselves.

To Conclude

Honestly, I know the Moment isn’t the phone for everybody. But I do think many more folk need to look into it. It really is a serious competitor in the smartphone market. What stirred this post was reading (and cringing all the while) James Kendrick over at jkontherun.com call the Motorola Droid the “best Android phone on the market”. He’s never used the Moment. Anywho, I love the guy’s blog, but I’d have to disagree. He needs to try the Moment out before making that decision. Unless he got paid up the wazoo for shamelessly endorsing the Droid. Then I’d just nod my head. I’d take the easy money, too.

City of God, City of Man

I’m currently reading Michael Horton’s “Introducing Covenant Theology.” I would recommend this book to just about everyone, especially to the dispensationalist or anyone struggling with or just not sure of their hermeneutical framework. Covenant Theology fits so cleanly with scripture that it puts other hermeneutics (e.g. dispensationalism) to shame, though some (e.g. dispensationalism) put themselves to shame anyway when in the light of sound reason and due to their extreme eisegetical approach.

Aside from the main thrust of the book, Horton pointed out something interesting concerning fundamentalism. I guess it’s something I’ve realized but have never put it quite together in words. Horton, like the fundamentalists themselves, traces the movement back to the Anabaptists circa 16th century. This group had a core distinction aside from their baptismal practices – total separation. Note what was written in the Anabaptist Schleitheim Confession concerning the practice of the Anabaptists:

A separation shall be made from the evil and from the wickedness which the devil planted in the world; in this manner, simply that we shall not have fellowship with them (the wicked) and not run with them in the multitude of their abominations. This is the way it is: Since all who do not walk in the obedience of faith, and have not united themselves with God so that they wish to do His will, are a great abomination before God, it is not possible for anything to grow or issue from them except abominable things. For truly all creatures are in but two classes, good and bad, believing and unbelieving, darkness and light, the world and those who (have come) out of the world, God’s temple and idols, Christ and Belial; and none can have part with the other… From this we should learn that everything which is not united with our God and Christ cannot be other than an abomination which we should shun and flee from. By this is meant all Catholic and Protestant works and church services, meetings and church attendance, drinking houses, civic affairs, the oaths sworn in unbelief and other things of that kind, which are highly regarded by the world and yet are carried on in flat contradiction to the command of God, in accordance with all the unrighteousness which is in the world. From all these things we shall be separated and have no part with them for they are nothing but an abomination, and they are the cause of our being hated before our Christ Jesus, Who has set us free from the slavery of the flesh and fitted us for the service of God through the Spirit Whom He has given us.

Note the disdain even for civil responsibility. One of the overarching philosophies of the Anabaptists is the idea that anyone who is not a Christian is wholly evil and all things done or instated by those who are not of the church are also wholly evil and therefore condemned to use by Christians. This includes academia, governments, and culture. Christ, to the Anabaptists, was against culture. This was largely in retaliation to the Roman Catholic church, which sought cultural assimilation as one of its main thrusts. Horton argues that “the problem with the Anabaptists on this point, Calvin argued, was that they would not distinguish between creation and fall or between the two kingdoms instituted by God. In this way, justification before God was confused with moral, social, and political righteousness, undermining both civility between Christian and non-Christian as well as the gospel.” In other words, the Fall tarnished the image of God found in Man. It did not, however, annihilate it. Man is corrupted with sin and fallen from glory but still bears the image of God and of a divine creation.

There is a people of God and a people against God, but this city of darkness is not to be confused with the City of Man. The City of Man is such that is marked by governments, civil legislation, and cultural inclination. It is interested in the physical and aesthetic qualities and properties of reality. The City of God is such that is categorized by the church. Its head is Christ, and its interests rest in pleasing and glorifying God. The redeemed have a dual citizenship in this present age. They are of the City of God, but also of the City of Man. Man’s systems are not the modus operandi of God, and one day “the kingdoms of this world” will become “the kingdom of our God.” But it is paramount to remember that mankind still retains the image of God, whether they are of the covenant or not, and the things that he build are not evil in themselves. It is not the “Christianizing” of civil governments but the Christianizing of individuals to become citizens of the City of God that the church has been charged with. All in all, we are not to assimilate government and church, as the Roman Catholic church, but neither are we to separate from and disdain the cultural and governmental aspects of the civil City of Man, as the Anabaptists. The difference between the Christian and the non is that the Christian, in his dual citizenship, has a responsibility to both cities. Horton puts it best when he explains that “while cultural activity can never be redemptive, the redeemed will view creation and cultural activity with new spectacles. The enormous interest in cultural pursuits that the Reformed tradition produced was never seen as entirely separate from heavenly citizenship but part of its embodiment in concern for neighbor.”

Christianity, therefore, is responsible to itself and to the mandates of Christ. It is the covenant of the redeemed, not for the secular world. Therefore, to conclude in the words of Michael Horton, it is not for the church “to seek to impose their distinctively Christian convictions on society through the kingdom of power, as both Rome and the radical Anabaptists tried to do. Rather, they are to pursue their dual citizenship according to the distinct policies proper to each kingdom. The Bible functions as the constitution for the covenant people, not for the secular state.”

What’s Your Study Gear?

Almost as important as the subjects we study are the tools we use to study them. I’m constantly looking for new tools to enhance the way I read and study, and currently I’ve landed on just a handful of gadgets that have greatly enhanced the way I do work.

Here’s a picture of my standard study gear:

At the bottom of that pile there is my Amazon Kindle 2. I admit that I can’t always use it with the sort of books I like to study from and it’s quite often when I need to use the good ol’ print books. However, the Kindle, in my opinion, is more than worth the purchase for the few books that I can get for it. I say few, and indeed it is a few compared to the amount of print books available, but the biggest thing that turned me on about the Kindle over other e-book platforms was that it had the largest selection of books in my venue than the others. The second thing was the price of the books, and the third thing was the Whispernet instant purchasing. I love the ability to highlight and write notes in the books, and the Kindle places all my highlights and notes in a convenient .txt file for later use. It’s an indispensable tool for any serious reader.

That other cool gadget there is the recently released Viliv S5. The Viliv S5 is a fully functioning, handheld, Windows XP computer. Its internals are basically the same as an HP Mini netbook – Intel Atom 1.33 GHz processor, 1 Gb RAM, 60 Gb HDD. It’s a world more practical for reading internet articles, etc. than having to always use the notebook form factor. Using Bible study software on the S5 turns it into a reference library in your pocket. Taking quick notes can also be done using the on-screen keyboard. If the typing is more serious, I use my bluetooth keyboard (that device in the middle), though the on-screen isn’t that bad – I typed this entire blog on the onscreen during a commute. That’s the great wonder about the Viliv S5 – small enough to take anywhere with you so you’re prepared for anything. Reading blogs on this thing with the screen rotated in portrait mode is just beautiful. I’d recommend this device to any serious studier or student, of the Bible or otherwise

Currently, I’m using PC study Bible 5 as my reference software, though when I get the chance (i.e. money), I’ll be getting the Logos software. I find their interface more appealing, and the Logos add-on library is so extensive as to be pretty insane. The doctrinal fair of Logos’ book choices seems to suit m taste better as well.

So there you have it, my study tech. What electronic gear do you use to enhance your studies? Leave a comment!

Today’s Quick Thought – Heb. 13

Hebrews 13 sure is a popular chapter. It’s too bad only a couple verses out of this immensely inspirational book are the most oft quoted. I don’t know how many times I’ve heard a preacher/Sunday school teacher/bible college professor in the Fundamentalist camp quote verse 17 as a proof text that I needed to cut my hair, or not listen to rock music, or not wear jeans, etc. “Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they keep watch over your souls.” How can you argue with this logic? The most frustrating thing, of course, was that after many good minutes (or even hours) of debating one of these topics, this verse would pop up as an easy-out any time the argument for a certain belief of conduct drew them into a corner. It works really well. I wish I’d have thought of it first. This argument may be found from pulpit to Fundamentalist magazine (where I once read it within an article as an argument for how a Christian should dress). It’s a very unreasonable claim to a “because I said so” sort of argument.

I am in no way downplaying the words of the scriptures. But I believe the problem here is that this passage must be taken with a very strict caveat: Which authority? The author of Hebrews clearly intended authorities whom he knew that were firmly grounded in good Christian doctrine and practice. If I can read this and say it applies to my church, no questions asked, then who’s to say a Charismatic can’t to the same? Or even a Muslim? It is therefore up to us to discern Biblical doctrine, to seek out those authorities whom we may say are truly Christ-like and doctrinally strong in both knowledge and practice. If we may find any discrepancy in the given authority, that particular area of doctrine or practice should not be followed according to their ideas. We’re deceiving ourselves if we think those to whom the author referred are any authority of any church.

Now don’t get me wrong, I don’t endorse rebellion and constant questioning of authority. But I believe that the author of Hebrews gave us the extent to which we are to obey our authorities right in the very same verse: “Let them do this with joy and not with complaints, for this would be no advantage for you.” I’ve already argued the absurdity of wholesale followership to arbitrary leaders. But it seems what the author wanted to avoid most was useless argumentation. If I go to a Bible College that tells me I must wear suits every day, I’ll be in the wrong for trying to rebel simply because I believe a Christian doesn’t necessarily best express his position by dressing like a corrupted politician or lawyer or Mormon or… alright, that’s enough . It’s incorrect for me to assume that it is now morally wrong for me to differ and to dress differently when I’m not at the college. But it’s equally wrong for me to cause contention about things that I need not bash heads about.

Also, on a side note, I’m tired of hearing about how we need to obey the government, respect the president, be good citizens, etc. because of Paul’s mandate to obey the governmental authorities. Paul didn’t live in America. America was built on a rebellion! It functions by people complaining and doing something about it – it endorses a type of rebellion. This isn’t a dictatorship (not originally, at any rate). This is a government that requires a rebellion of sorts. Now civil disobedience in terms of criminal action is wrong, and I believe that this is what Paul was more referring to, considering his governmental situation.

But then again, the Patriots did that too…

Proposition 8 and The Question of True Freedom

(originally written by myself on 29 Oct 2008)

It seems that the people I associate with, the Christians, are torn apart on this. However, it is for all the wrong reasons. On the one side, there are those who are against the moral issue of homosexual union in marriage or otherwise. These, according to moral conviction, are voting positive on Proposition 8 to ban homosexual marriage. The other side of the Christian community, a minority amongst evangelicals, is voting negative on the proposition, but also according to moral conviction that homosexual marriage is not wrong. The major discrepancy is what both sides have in common – voting according to moral conviction.

It seems that there is a growing sentiment that we must vote for what we believe, and that voting to allow something considered sinful is in itself a sin. Let’s explore this notion a bit. Our constitution allows the citizens of the United States the freedom of and from religion. Any Christian would vote for freedom of religion. However, allowing this free practice of faith and belief also allows other religions onto the playing field that the Christian church would consider an abomination to God. Is it then wrongful for a Christian to support the freedom of religion? No sensible Christian I know would say that. It certainly is not. But it’s a system of give and take. It would be wrong, however, for a Christian (or any citizen) to support any proposition of government that favors only one institution of religion. A Christian could not rightfully wish this one imposed and established institution to be Christianity, for they know it could easily have been made another religion or even a different Christian denomination. Therefore, all reasonable Christians I’ve known support both the freedom of and from religion and the banning of government established religions. Both have a flip side to the coin – they allow the practice of other religions without imposition from their own. Supporting this is then also supporting the free practice of religions against the cause of Christ. So we may see that the simple act of allowing a law that permits sin is not necessarily itself a sin.

The other argument is the family structure and the detriment of tearing down the natural order. But, as we just have explored, Christians are willing to allow the freedoms of religions that most would believe are a detriment to the nation or any group of people – because it may allow them to worship and practice as they wish. It’s also a rash fallacy to assert that allowing for homosexual marriage would influence the majority’s opinion on what true marriage is and that this “breaking down” of the genetic structure of families will landslide into the breaking down of the nation and the majority opinion of family. Tied into this is the argument of what children will be, or must be, taught in public education. Whether or not children are taught about marriage in the school structure or if they then, if homosexual marriage is allowed, will be taught homosexual marriage and encouraged to celebrate it is not an issue of Proposition 8. Such a biased and unwarranted response from the public education systems may be a possibility, but this is a fault of the educational system and must be addressed separately as are all such matters (Creationism vs. Evolution). The educational systems should not respond in this way without a consensus of the people. Education is not necessarily a “civil liberty” as far as the manner of the education administered but is rather a personal choice on the behalf of the affected parties. As far as what exactly is being taught in schools to young children is a matter that should be assessed by a general consensus from the parents whose children it affects (All of these matters, however, would be far more greatly resolved with an at least semi-privatized educational system, of course, but that’s neither here nor there). In the end, the civil liberties and rights of certain citizens should not be detained on behalf of an improper reaction by other citizens to those rights being administered. After all, the Second Amendment gives me the right to keep and bear firearms, but it doesn’t mean that second graders have to be taught how to use one.

The only sin occurring here is that of selfishness and pride. It’s unfair, as far as government is concerned, to assert one’s personal freedom, yet decisively disallow another’s. The Christian must learn that it is necessary to separate moral opinion from political decision. This is an issue of government and is separate from any opinions of right or wrong. The church itself owes a debt of gratitude to the free practice of personal morality. If moral decision was not made free, there would be no soul winning, no knocking on doors, a passing out of tracts. If laws are passed based on moral issues such as the banning of homosexual marriages, then who’s to stop the attempt at passing propositions to ban evangelical efforts? This is not a landslide. It’s a very real comparison and a very real potential threat. The church must be careful when dealing with the affairs of the world and when trying to impose its moral grid on those who don’t necessarily believe. As citizens of free government, we must endorse freedom for all. As Christians, we must remember that God’s chosen tool to impart His Spirit, salvation, and Holy Word upon mankind is not the government, but the church. It is a sad day in the church’s existence when it sees itself as so powerless that it must look to the systems of the world to make its impact.

“For what do I have to do with judging those outside? Are you not to judge those inside? But God will judge those outside.” (1 Corinthians 5: 12-13, NET Bible)