Scripture Indicates that Believer Baptism is a Requirement for Salvation

 

In this CD, Mr. Bercot takes a clarifying look at what Scripture has to say about water baptism. I should add that when he sees doctrinal controversy between denominations (such as on this topic), he resolves it by looking at Scripture, and what the early church (pre-325 AD, before Catholicism dominated it) believed about it. Their beliefs were more likely backed by Scripture, since that church was closer to the apostles–and they were a church that the Lord made powerful–so it’s likely He didn’t see any substantially deviant doctrine there.

The early church believed, from Scripture, that in adult, or believer baptism, the following things happened: (1) all of a person’s prior sins are washed away; (2) a person is born again through baptism of water and the Holy Spirit; 3) through baptism, a person becomes a member of Christ’s church.  (This series of events do not happen with infant baptism because there must be a confession by the one being baptized that he/she has believed, and will follow Christ. That’s clear from the many instances of baptism in the Book of Acts.)  Because of the importance of these 3, we must conclude that the salvation process is not complete without baptism.  When the person confesses Christ in Acts, details show they were baptized right away.  If a person died after confession of Christ but before a soon-baptism (an unlikely event), we believe that in God’s grace, they were still on the way to heaven.  But if they hid their confession and refused public baptism, that was not in God’s plan.  You cannot hide a light under a basket.  Evangelism is the only way the kingdom of God can grow.  It is one of the gifts in Galatians 5, and one cannot deny Christ–such as being ashamed of what He has done for you.  If you hide it, do you really live in Christ?  Do you understand that He has saved us from hell, which we truly deserve because of our sin, and has invited us to heaven.  You must share to to anybody–even “good” people (who won’t get to heaven on their “goodness”).

Is there proof from Scripture? Let’s start with John 3:5:

Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

Does this not say that “born of water” is water baptism? Even in the Greek, the word translated “water” simply refers to physical water. Does it not clearly say that water baptism is essential in being born again?

Mark 16:16 says:

He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.

This clearly requires baptism to “be saved,” or to be in heaven and escape Judgment. Of course, there are other verses which simply say believe in Christ, and be saved.  But many verses only give a partial look at the concept; you must consider all the New Testament together to get the whole picture.  For instance, if all you have to do is “believe,” are we talking about just mental assent?  A mind-thing, but not a heart-thing?  What about the person who “believes,” but doesn’t change their life?  They still live a worldly life, and don’t let Christ be involved with important decisions.  Yes, we should give command of all of our life to God’s glory, and pray about those important decisions for His direction. Besides, there is much more involved than “mental assent” with the Greek derivative for the word “believe.”  It’s a heart-thing.  where you are committed to abiding with Him, the same as breathing.  We love Him if we obey His commandments, and baptism was a commandment that Christ gave to everybody (Matthew 28:19-20).

Romans 10:9-10:

….that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

There’s that public confession.

Acts 2:36-38:

Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.” 37 Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” 38 Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit

In verses 37-38, Peter has the ultimate evangelistic opportunity; the big question on the silver platter has been asked of him–“what shall we do?”. Does he say what all of us evangelical Protestants have been taught, telling them to pray to “let Jesus into their heart”? No; after they’ve been shown who Jesus is in earlier verses in Acts 2, assuming they believe in Him, what they need to do to be saved…is…(1)repentance and (2) baptism. He emphasizes the importance of baptism, saying “every one of you” needs to do it. He further says that without baptism, they cannot have the “gift of the Holy Spirit.”  (Different denominations have different views on what exactly that is, but what’s important, if you really want to be saved, why would you NOT want such a gift?  So jump in; be baptized.) These additional two steps will give them remission of sins.  You must want “remission,” defined as “cancellation of a debt.”  If you bear the weight of sin when you are judged, you won’t make heaven.

Acts 22:16 was when Saul was saved, becoming Paul, and he was told:

…And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.’

Baptism, as it says,  washes away our sins. That’s very important, is it not? Without it, with the guilt of sins on us, how can you get to heaven? (Again, allowance is made elsewhere for those who cannot be baptized.) Note the urgent tones that they should be baptized right away after it is evident that the Spirit has opened his eyes.

The early church fathers felt that baptism is important enough that they believed, and said, that a man who was saved, immediately imprisoned, then martyred fulfilled the required baptism—by having a baptism of blood.

Galatians 3:27:

For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ

What is the meaning of “put on Christ”? Read Romans 13:14:

But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to fulfill its lusts

So it means wrapping yourself in godly thoughts and not thinking about sinful ones or things of the world. A result of salvation.  A phrase in the same book is “clothe yourself with Christ.” This makes me think of Genesis 3, when God clothed Adam with skins of an animal (which required a sacrifice) after Adam sinned. That blood being shed to provide the skin was the first evidence of God’s plan for His Son, the Lamb, whose blood was shed once for all. The animal sacrifice was a sacrificial covering for the effects of sin.

Going under the water is symbolic of His death, and rising out of the water is symbolic of Resurrection.  Romans 6:2-4 defines it and does the metaphor:

How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? 3 Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? 4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

The expectation is that we must “walk in newness of life,” a subject for another paper.

Titus 3:5: …but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit

The word “washing,” in Greek loutron, is defined as “a bath, a laver.”  This seems to speak of water baptism, does it not? Baptism results in regeneration, defined as becoming a new creation. And, as Jesus put it (John 3:3), that’s essential to go to heaven. And it clearly says, “He saved us, through the washing of regeneration (through the water baptism) and renewing of the Holy Spirit.”

Hebrews 10:22:

…let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.

“Pure water” is water baptism. Baptism helps gives us a full assurance of faith and enables us to draw near to Him.

I Peter 3:20b-21 uses the term “antitype.” That’s a New Testament fulfillment from an Old Testament prefigure (the prefigure is called a type):

…in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water.  There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ. 

The type in the Old Testament is how the Ark saved Noah’s family from the death of the Flood.  The anti-type is baptism.  Peter bluntly points out that baptism, and Christ’s resurrection, save us. Of course, in context, and thinking of my “Paul v James” blogs, to be saved at the end, you need baptism combined with true faith, repentance, and abiding in obedience (John 15:1-6). Paul doesn’t want anyone to think that baptism merely is a temporary cleansing through works that has to be repeated, so he says that the symbol has nothing to do with removing “filth of the flesh.”  Baptism gives you a “good conscience toward God.”

Again, EVERY ONE OF THESE VERSES IS DIRECTED TO BELIEVERS WHO ARE MAKING A CHOICE TO BE BAPTIZED. There are no baptisms of babies in Scripture that we know of.

There are other “types” in the Old Testament. Consider I Corinthians 10:1-2’s comments on the Jews passing through the Red Sea:

Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, 2 all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.

So, to think of the type: was crossing the water of the Red Sea (a type of baptism) merely a “symbol” of their salvation from the Egyptians? No, crossing the water DID save them! Why do most evangelistic churches use the weak word “symbol,” taking away all the power associated with baptism, when they explain baptism? It seems pretty clear that using the Red Sea type, baptism completes our salvation. I use the word “complete” because other things of faith were involved too, all of which together ensured their salvation. They had already stepped out in faith to follow God’s leader Moses. In faith they believed the ten plagues were a message from God. In faith they obediently protected themselves from death at Passover, when they obeyed the instruction to put lamb’s blood on the doorposts. And when they packed their belongings and marched out into the desert—that was a great step of faith, since a sensible man would never expect to stay alive long in the desert. All of these things, faith plus obedience, ensured their salvation, but the baptism of passing through the Red Sea completed the initial job—but all this was still only at the beginning of their journey. They still had to place faith in God throughout the journey, and the battles with the Enemy that followed. Salvation is Not a one-and-done thing.  Subject of another blog.

Another Old Testament figure of baptism—mentioned several times by early Christians—was Naaman, the leper. Leprosy is a metaphor of sin. In II Kings 5, Naaman was purified of leprosy when he was baptized in the Jordan. This was a symbol of what baptism can do for us regarding the leprosy of sin.  The sin is wiped away.

If you’re thinking, about the early Church, “surely there was some group who didn’t hold to this view of baptism, who thought it was just symbolic,” you’re right—the Gnostics felt that way. Of course, you also need to know what else they believed–that the creation of the earth and mankind was done by an inferior god, a second god, so his creation was flawed and beyond redemption, so they concluded that flesh cannot be saved. They did not believe in the resurrection of the body—you can’t get a perfect result from an imperfect body. Jesus couldn’t have come in the flesh, since He could never be imperfect, as all flesh is. Thus, they maintained, there was no God Incarnate. No one can be “reborn” through physical substances (since all such are evil)—like water. So baptism has no power to save, they said, it’s just a symbol of what’s happened in the spirit.  So say the Gnostics.  Are these views corrupt, or what?  Can you believe that they got one doctrine correct (“baptism is a symbol, has no deeper meaning), when all their other doctrines are so Wrong?

The vast majority of Protestants do not believe in the power and necessity of baptism, as seen by Scripture above, and think that it’s just a “symbol.” So, if you agree with the Gnostics that it’s just a “symbol,” you’re also saying that all the church fathers, as holy a group as you ever want to meet in heaven, men who were taught by the apostles–were dead wrong. Which group do you want to follow—the Gnostics or the church fathers? But our beliefs should be founded on literal Scripture, don’t you think? Can we argue against all the above Scriptural passages? Not without doing twisty reasoning (as all the MODERN commentators do), instead of simple, literal reading of God’s Word.  Does God want the common person to understand Scripture, or should we wait until the erudite commentators do their twisty reasoning and give us their “solution?”  God wants every one of us to understand, and would use common-sense literal readings where possible.  Water should mean water, wherever possible.

How did the church move away from this doctrine, if it’s correct? Why either baptize babies or, the opposite, say that’s it’s a “symbol?” I think the change in doctrine happened partly because the church reacted to people’s desire for “salvation by convenience”—people wanted to feel assurance of salvation, wanted a simple “formula.” So when the Catholic church was forming its doctrines, they came up with a convenient formula: do the sacraments, or ordinances, and you shall be saved. Infant baptism came about partly because when they conquered an entire nation, they wanted Everybody to get baptized and start believing as they do.  Also because, due to high infant deaths, and the ongoing fear that without baptism, their  baby would die with the stain of Original Sin (taught at the time), and wouldn’t go to heaven.  So people wanted assurance that their baby was saved when he died, so they rushed to have them baptized. Note that none of these changes were Scripturally based–they are mechanical devices, not a choice being made by a repentant sinner. This “mechanical” religion requires no relationship with Christ and no day-to-day holiness, as Scripture demands (see the “Paul vs James” blogs). Expanding “the kingdom of God,” as they called it, by sword, by expansion, by alliances with pagans, came naturally to them as well. Scripture explaining the truth of baptism became hidden, in an impossible language (Latin, which most people of that day couldn’t understand), so darkness reigned.

When pietism (late 1600s, beginning in Germany) and the Great Awakening revival (1700s, in England and New England) came along, they placed their emphasis for salvation on the conversion experience; in some cases, the evangelist didn’t want to complicate things by explaining the correct theology of baptism to Catholics, or anybody else. The evangelist said, let’s make salvation easy to understand–more people can be saved.  They called the spiritual awakenings the “new birth.” Before that, in state churches, everyone had already been baptized—as babies–but many grew up dead spiritually. Rather than preach on the negative topic, “why baptism as a baby wasn’t good enough now,” the revivalists wanted to see as many people turn their life around as possible, and make the salvation easy to get to. So it was the decision for Jesus, that was it.  Oh, yeah, you “should be” baptized as a witness to show to everyone that you’re saved, but you can already be sure, they said, that you’re going to heaven.  Everybody loved assurance like that.  No follow-up requirements.

Now I again warn you: Keep in mind this extremely important caution (read the “Paul v James” blogs): Don’t assume you can get baptized, and you’re saved and done.  A continuing saved relationship with Christ, following His commands (and baptism was one of them) are necessary. “Inward” baptism—of the Spirit—was essential as well, not just “outward” baptism.

When you want to repent of your sin and submit to the Lord Jesus AND when you are baptized in the water, then your sins are washed away. You need both. If you do the outward baptism without the inward desire for submission and cleansing–you’re still spiritually questionable, on “probation,” or dead.  In any event, you need to have an abiding relationship with Christ so you don’t lose salvation.

Acknowledgements:  Dave Bercot CD, “Baptism”

The Antichrist is Islamic

 This blog is for all you eschatology, or future event, thinkers out there.  I have an important announcement:  You may want to think more broadly about who the Antichrist is, particularly if you are a follower of Lindsey, LaHaye, or Hagee, because this study considers the idea of whether the Antichrist is a Muslim, a conclusion from the book The Islamic Antichrist by Joel Richardson.  His best proof for that claim is by proving that the same man is in the Bible and in the Quran (or Koran, depending on your spelling).  The irony is, the same man is the Antichrist in the Bible, but the Savior in the Quran! This one chapter in the book that I will summarize might convince you too. 

Now, first, keep in mind that there is more than one sacred text to the Muslim Scripture:  In addition to the foundational Quran (Mohammed’s writings of God's actual words through the angel), you have the Sunna (presumably Mohammed’s life and thoughts) and the hadiths (presumably Muhammed’s sayings); these are sacred as well.  A deeply dedicated Muslim believer will follow any of these to the death, if need be. 

 

Why is this study of the Quran worthwhile, you may ask?  The Quran records five things that a Muslim must believe in to be a true Muslim; these five areas are fixed and non-negotiable.  As it says in sura 2:177:  “righteous is he who believeth in (1) Allah and (2) the Last Day and (3) the angels and (4) the Scripture and (5) the prophets.”  Note the importance of the Last Day to them.  Eschatology (study of future events) may be optional for study to us Christians, but their scary Last Days may lead to some irrational and murderous action—on us.  The religious leaders truly rule in Iran, not the secular government.  We need to know their predictions of their future, in thinking about a defensive strategy against the determined Muslim who wants to help bring about their version of the Last Day.  There is no doubt in their minds how those days will go well for them if they act to bring it about, and their scenario does not look good for us. 

 

Of their many key figures in the Last Days, the man above all men was al-Mahdi,  which means “the Guided One.”  Other names given to him by Shia Muslims are Sahib Al-Zaman and Al-Mahdi al-Muntadhar. These names mean “the Lord of the Age” and “the Awaited Savior.”  Let me quote hadiths, for much of the details Muslims have in their theology are about him.  Then we’ll compare to what the Scripture says about the same man.

From the hadiths:  The Mahdi will be a world ruler through revolution

To quote Al-Sadr and Mutahhari, former leaders of imams, “He will reappear on the appointed day, and lead a world revolution, and set up a new world order… "  Quoting Izzat and ‘Arif, this will bring ”victory of the Truth and the fall of all tyrants.” According to Islamic tradition, the Mahdi is said to preside over the entire earth as the final caliph of Islam.

Now the Bible truth about the Antichrist: The Antichrist will be a world ruler through military power (Daniel 7:23)

 

‘The fourth beast (this is the "beast" that is yet future) shall be a fourth kingdom on earth, Which shall be different from all other kingdoms, And shall devour the whole earth, trample it and break it in pieces

The first three kingdoms (“beast” or “beasts” can mean kingdoms or people). were Babylon, Medo-Persia, and Greece, most experts agree.  Each of those dominated the known world.  Rome was the fourth kingdom.  Based on Daniel 7:24-25, a revived fourth kingdom will be worldwide, but is yet future. Some say the fourth kingdom was the Roman empire in two parts.  Part 1 has already occurred. Part II is future, they say.  We’re suggesting otherwise: we believe this latter kingdom is Islamic.

 

Secondly, hadiths say: The Mahdi will be worshiped, a popular political genius, and able to perform climate control

“Allah will sow love of him in the hearts of all people…everyone only talks about Him.”  He will have control over the wind and the rain and the crops; the world will live in prosperity, says Sahih Hakim Mustadrak. 

 

Bible:  The Antichrist will be worshiped, a popular political and military genius, and seemingly able to come back from a fatal wound (Revelation 13:3,4,8): 

³And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast.…they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?”… ⁸ All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

 

Third:  Per Hadiths:  The Mahdi will be spiritually good and a Messiah;

Sahih Hakim Mustadrak claims:  “He will give away wealth profusely, flocks will be in abundance.”  He will be perceived to be a miraculous archaeologist, uncovering Jewish and Christian sacred treasures, perhaps to convert them to Islam at the beginning: he finds the Torah (first five books of the Old Testament) from a mountain in Syria, and the Gospel from a town called Antioch (a major town in south-central Turkey).  And if that weren’t enough, the Ark of the Covenant (a wooden chest clad with gold, containing the Ten Commandments) will be brought forth from the Lake of Tiberias and will be placed in Jerusalem.  As quoted by Ayatullah Baqir al-Sadr:  “For the ultimate salvation of mankind he is the Pole Star of hope on which the gaze of humanity is fixed…He stands high above the narrow walls in which humanity is cut up and divided.”  To quote Al-Sadr and Mutahhari, “He will…set up a new world order based on justice, righteousness, and virtue.” From Sachedina again:  “He will create a just social order and a world free from oppression.” 

 

The Bible has a different view:  The Antichrist will be spiritually the embodiment of evil, with hate and murder at his core beliefs:

II Thessalonians 2:4 shows his hunger to be worshiped, and his blasphemy against God: 

…who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God

Revelation 13:4a shows the Antichrist (the beast) gets his authority from Satan (here as in many places, his symbol is the dragon):

So they worshiped the dragon who gave authority to the beast

 

In further proof of his real nature being evil, let’s quote Muslim sacred texts which indicate his hatred and murderous spirit.  As Sunan Abu Dawud says, “Every believer will be obligated to support him.”  As Ibn Maja says, “Give him your allegiance, even if you have to crawl over ice.” The Mahdi’s means of accomplishing world revolution will include multiple military jihads (holy wars), as Abdullrahman Kelani says.  Even Harun Yahya, supposedly a moderate, says, “the Mahdi will invade all the places between East and West.” Sheikh Kabbani says, “black flags coming from the area of Khorasan (in Iran) will signify the appearance of the Mahdi is nigh.”  The black flag is the flag of jihad.  On the flag is one word written in Arabic:  punishment.  Here are some really ugly quotes showing their anti-Semitism:  Egyptian authors Muhammad ibn Izzat and ‘Arif:  “The Mahdi will be victorious and eradicate those pigs and dogs and idols of this time…will abolish the leadership of the Jews…and put an end to the domination of the Satans who spit evil into people and cause corruption in the earth, making them slaves of false idols and ruling the world by laws other than the Sharia of the Lord of the worlds.”    

To quote a famous Islamic traditional belief:  “the last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews, and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide behind a stone or a tree and a stone or tree would say:  “Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him.” 

Fourth:  Hadiths: The Mahdi will have his seat of authority in Jerusalem

As Tirmidhi says, “No power will be able to stop them and they will finally reach Eela Baitul Maqdas, where they will erect their flags (i.e., the jihad black flags).”  This place is  the Jewish Temple Mount, in Jerusalem, which no longer exists—but will then.

To quote Izzat and ‘Arif again: Jerusalem will be the location of the rightly guided caliphate and the center of Islamic rule, which will be headed by Imam al-Mahdi. 

 

Bible:  The Antichrist will set his throne in God’s Temple (Jerusalem) and desecrate it

Zechariah 14:2: For I will gather all the nations to battle against Jerusalem; The city shall be taken, The houses rifled, And the women ravished.  Half of the city shall go into captivity, But the remnant of the people shall not be cut off from the city.

 

Matthew 24:15, 21:  “Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (i.e., in Jerusalem)…²¹ For then there will be great tribulation...

 

Fifth:  Hadiths: The Mahdi will present Jews and Christians with a “Hobson’s Choice”

 

To quote the Ayatollah Ibrahim Amini:  The Mahdi will offer the religion of Islam to the Jews and Christians; if they accept it, they will be spared, otherwise they will be killed.

 

Bible:  The Antichrist will present Jews and Christians with a “Hobson’s Choice”

This is in Rev. 12:17, keeping in mind that the Antichrist is the embodiment of Satan (the dragon).  The woman being persecuted is Israel (as elsewhere in Scripture).  Note the added reference to “her offspring, who….keep the..testimony of Jesus Christ.”  This refers to Christians.  Thus, we Christians will not escape the Antichrist’s intense persecution:

 

And the dragon was enraged with the woman, and he went to make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ

Sixth:  Hadiths: The Mahdi will ride a white horse

The Muslims’ authority for that is the Bible, of all things (which they consider it a source, but “less than sacred” book).  They quote Revelation 6:1-2:

Now I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals; and I heard one of the four living creatures saying with a voice like thunder, “Come and see.” ² And I looked, and behold, a white horse. He who sat on it had a bow; and a crown was given to him, and he went out conquering and to conquer.

 

The Bible agrees, but with a deception and a different name: The Antichrist will ride a white horse

The same Bible verse is used.  But Scripture actually proves that this is not a messiah, but a deceiver.  For proof, first, we look at the word “crown” in Rev. 6:2.  The Greek word is “stephanos,” used for the winner of war games.  A true Messiah crown is a “diadem,” a kingly crown.  Plus, note the chronology of subsequent seals in Revelation 6:3-17:  war, famines, death and Hades, martyrdom, and cosmic disturbances.  There is no way this follows a triumphal entry of a Messiah.  No, it follows a deceiver, one who pretends to be a Messiah.  And the world then chaotically reels under his hatred and destruction, when he unmasks his true nature. 

 

Seventh, the best comparison of all:  From the hadiths:  The Mahdi will make a Seven year treaty with Jews

This is the most shocking and convincing testimony that the Antichrist and the Mahdi are the same.  Note the hadith first:  this is called the “fourth treaty,” to be made with a descendant of Moses’ brother Aaron the priest.  Now to quote Muhammad Ali Ibn Zubair:  "There will be four peace agreements between you and the Romans (i.e., Christians, Westerners).  The fourth will be mediated through a person who will be from the progeny of Hadrat Aaron and will be upheld for seven years.  The people asked, “Who will be the leader of the people at that time?”  The prophet said: He will be from my progeny and will be exactly 40 years of age.

 

Bible:  The Antichrist will make a seven year treaty with Jews

This is from Daniel 9:27.

Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one seven; But in the middle of the seven He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate

Note the use of “abominations” and “desolate,” which we tie in to Jesus’ reference to the Antichrist (from Matthew 24, above).  Describing the neutral word “seven” to mean “seven years” works, obviously. Few negotiated treaties of importance are only for seven weeks, or months.

 

 

Thus, in these seven important areas, what happens when the Antichrist comes to power will mean the Muslims who read their sacred texts will be completely deceived into thinking that this horrible man, this embodiment of Satan, is Their Messiah!  This will bring about, I believe, an intensity to follow their sacred texts—which are texts of murder and hatred.  (I have another blog on their version of Allah vs. our Biblical God). And with over a billion Muslims in the world, they would rise up in religious fervor and perform whatever their sacred texts tell them to.   This would lead to unbelievable deaths and chaos. 

Christians, when persecution comes, as it may be in our lifetimes, you should think of the ultimate sacrifice--as Jesus did for us.  Think nothing of your bodies, which are temporary abodes.  If all this happens in this age, be ready to be a martyr if given the choice of Jesus or al-Mahdi.  Your reward for the right choice will be a place in heaven for eternity. If you "play" along with pretending to worship the Mahdi (to survive), you are condemning your soul to hell. The Bible is clear on that in Revelation 14:9-11:

 Then a third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand, ¹⁰ he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. ¹¹ And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name.”

Thus, every one alive at that time has a "Hobson's Choice:"  Do you save your body, which is only temporary, for a few years of survival, by bending the knee to the antichrist?  But you spend an eternity of torture in hell.  Or do you trust Scripture, and willingly sacrifice whatever you have to to hold onto Christ, who will bring your soul to a forever existence in heaven?  You decide!  Whatever you do, do NOT say, "I know God.  He would never make hell for people like me."  Well, you THINK you know God.  Why don't you spend a little time, read All Scripture, and maybe you'll see yourself, the reason for Christ's crucifixion, and God's personality a little differently?

Acknowledgement:  The Islamic Antichrist, Joel Richardson

A New Kind of Christian

 The Church is fragmented into hundreds of different sects and groups, so much so as to say, “There sure is an awful lot of interpretation of this Book out there.” Can we for sure say that “We don’t have the ability to be deceived, or come to a wrong doctrinal conclusion”? We should be humble enough to bow and pray, and say, “God, show me Your truth!” We naturally think our world view is right, and everybody should think like us. But it's also true that compromise for the sake of unity is a risk. But that’s what Christ wanted, after all. Wouldn’t it be cool if there was a Church of Newport, let’s say? All the churches in that city got together.  Like the churches in the book of Acts. But uniting churches is easier said than done.

Really, are which church to attend picked on the basics of logic?  Don’t people choose their denomination based on family history, or what their heart secretly wants to hear about God? What do people really want in a church? They say they want “something authentic, something real.” They dislike orthodoxy, which seems dead and outdated. They often are swayed by the “Emerging church” movement. But that movement’s desire to have relevance causes them to “come down to the world’s level.” And books like “A New Kind of Christian” disavow too much of “old Christian.”

If people are really looking for authenticity, they should look again at the lifestyles and words of the Christians in the book of Acts. The Kingdom of God was so irresistible, so radical, that the people had one of two choices: Either join us, or persecute us. Just like Jesus said, You’re either my friend, or you’re my enemy. There’s no “gray area” with Christ. The Church, in Acts—it will make your heart pound when you read it. When you read it, don’t you have a longing in your heart to see church today like that? When you look at the radical nature of what God is doing through them, does it ever make your heart burn? Let’s examine their lives.

Acts 2:41-47: Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them. 42 And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers. 43 Then fear came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles. 44 Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common, 45 and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need. 46 So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart, 47 praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved.

Acts 4:29-35: Now, Lord, look on their threats, and grant to Your servants that with all boldness they may speak Your word, 30 by stretching out Your hand to heal, and that signs and wonders may be done through the name of Your holy Servant Jesus.” 31 And when they had prayed, the place where they were assembled together was shaken; and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and they spoke the word of God with boldness. 32 Now the multitude of those who believed were of one heart and one soul; neither did anyone say that any of the things he possessed was his own, but they had all things in common. 33 And with great power the apostles gave witness to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And great grace was upon them all. 34 Nor was there anyone among them who lacked; for all who were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the proceeds of the things that were sold, 35 and laid them at the apostles’ feet; and they distributed to each as anyone had need.

Acts 5:12-16: And through the hands of the apostles many signs and wonders were done among the people. And they were all with one accord in Solomon’s Porch. 13 Yet none of the rest dared join them, but the people esteemed them highly. 14 And believers were increasingly added to the Lord, multitudes of both men and women, 15 so that they brought the sick out into the streets and laid them on beds and couches, that at least the shadow of Peter passing by might fall on some of them. 16 Also a multitude gathered from the surrounding cities to Jerusalem, bringing sick people and those who were tormented by unclean spirits, and they were all healed.

Acts 8:35-39: Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him. 36 Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?” 37 Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.” And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.” 38 So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him. 39 Now when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught Philip away, so that the eunuch saw him no more; and he went on his way rejoicing.

Acts 9:32-35: Now it came to pass, as Peter went through all parts of the country, that he also came down to the saints who dwelt in Lydda. 33 There he found a certain man named Aeneas, who had been bedridden eight years and was paralyzed.34 And Peter said to him, “Aeneas, Jesus the Christ heals you. Arise and make your bed.” Then he arose immediately. 35 So all who dwelt at Lydda and Sharon saw him and turned to the Lord.

Acts 13:2-3: As they ministered to the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, “Now separate to Me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.” 3 Then, having fasted and prayed, and laid hands on them, they sent them away.

Acts 14:8-10: And in Lystra a certain man without strength in his feet was sitting, a cripple from his mother’s womb, who had never walked. 9 This man heard Paul speaking. Paul, observing him intently and seeing that he had faith to be healed, 10 said with a loud voice, “Stand up straight on your feet!” And he leaped and walked.

Acts 16:25-31: But at midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns to God, and the prisoners were listening to them. 26 Suddenly there was a great earthquake, so that the foundations of the prison were shaken; and immediately all the doors were opened and everyone’s chains were loosed. 27 And the keeper of the prison, awaking from sleep and seeing the prison doors open, supposing the prisoners had fled, drew his sword and was about to kill himself. 28 But Paul called with a loud voice, saying, “Do yourself no harm, for we are all here.” 29 Then he called for a light, ran in, and fell down trembling before Paul and Silas. 30 And he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” 31 So they said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.”

Acts 20:7-11: Now on the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul, ready to depart the next day, spoke to them and continued his message until midnight. 8 There were many lamps in the upper room where they were gathered together. 9 And in a window sat a certain young man named Eutychus, who was sinking into a deep sleep. He was overcome by sleep; and as Paul continued speaking, he fell down from the third story and was taken up dead. 10 But Paul went down, fell on him, and embracing him said, “Do not trouble yourselves, for his life is in him.” 11 Now when he had come up, had broken bread and eaten, and talked a long while, even till daybreak, he departed.

How inspiring!  These are regular people, these are true stories.  Let our hearts hunger for reality with Jesus Christ like they wanted--and  got. Look at His willingness to pour His Spirit out. People were so moved that they gave away their wealth, unreservedly; miracles were flowing, angels were appearing (other verses). When you look into God’s heart for His people, do we still believe what Jesus said—“You’ll do greater things than I have done”? Do we really believe that Christ is the same, yesterday, today, and forever? Or have you bought into doctrine that cynically says, “That was then: wake up, this is now.” Wouldn’t you just want to be in the early church? We didn’t mention about how leaders were losing their heads, literally, that believers were persecuted and had to flee. In a couple of cases, church people were killed by the Holy Spirit for lying. That was an intense church. Would you have counted the cost and joined—or are you content to be comfortable? You know, our churches fall so short. You could argue that, hey, miracles are not the whole story, but doesn’t Scripture say that “these signs will follow those who believe.” (Mark 16:17).

What keeps it from happening in America now? Jesus might answer by saying, Do we really want to meet Him on His terms? Our lifestyle is quite different than that church. We don’t have their dedication. We are distracted by our worldly "toys." Are we hungry enough to pray for ten days straight? If anyone in the church is lacking, would we give up our food, would we all fast to get the money to feed them? Would we give up all of our excesses to meet those in need—do we have a heart to give like that?

Could it be that the reason for this difference is that our interpretation of doctrine is different than theirs? After all, doctrine and lifestyle go hand in hand. Doctrine is useless unless it transforms your life. You can think you believe something, but you only truly believe something if it moves you to action. Do you believe that people are on their way to hell? To the extent that you actually believe that, you will intercede for the lost, your heart will break when you see people that don’t know the Lord, you’ll stand on the street corner and plead with people, or write a letter to an aunt that doesn’t know Him. You’ll hit your knees often.

To the extent that you believe in something, it changes your life.

What was it the apostles believed that made their lives so radical? Let’s call it “doctrine that the apostles held.” Let’s spend some time reading the earliest church fathers, whose lifestyles were the closest to theirs. These men bled and died for the faith too; they sat at the feet of the apostles, or only a generation removed. Let’s interpret Scripture as close as possible to what the fathers believed and wrote about. These guys must’ve had their doctrine right, the way they lived. When we see lifestyles like the book of Acts, then we know that apostolic doctrine was taught. We’ve layered on some weaknesses in the 2000 years since, I suspect. Let’s find them. Are we ready to admit we might be wrong on some points? Sure, they didn’t have modern technology; but they did it one better—they just read the Bible, over and over and over. In fact, they were the people who debated thoroughly and decided on what was Scripture in the first place. They took the words literally, they consulted no twisting commentary; their knowledge of other Scripture enabled them to place things in the proper context to explain seemingly contradictory passages. They didn’t have to fool with interpreting Greek—they spoke it, they knew it intimately. Here is their lifestyle, 125 AD, first from a new believer:

They do not bear false witness; nor do they covet what is not theirs. They comfort their oppressors and make them their friends.  Their women are pure as virgins and their daughters are modest; their men keep themselves from all unlawful unions and uncleanness. They go their way in all modesty and cheerfulness. They love one another. They deliver their widows and orphans from those who would treat them harshly. He who has, gives to him who has not. They fast two or three days to supply the necessary food for the needy. They follow the commands of their Christ justly and seriously. Every morning and every hour they give thanks to God for His lovingkindness to them. If any righteous man passes from this world, they rejoice and give thanks to God.

Now from a non-believer, whose sarcasm was a compliment:

They despise the temples, as dead houses; they reject the gods. Half-naked themselves, they despise honors and purple robes. Oh, wondrous folly…They despise present torments, although they fear those which are future. They fear to die after death, but they do not fear to die for the present. The larger portion are in want, are cold, are laboring in hard work or hunger. And God allows it. You do not visit exhibitions; you reject public banquets and abhor sacred contests…you assume you will rise again but refuse to live in the meanwhile. Cease from prying into the destinies of the sky. What is wrong with you?

Could the church of America be accused of that? No, frankly. The church today, in fact, is too often accused of hypocrisy, of embezzlement, of worldliness. Mostly, lukewarmness. The early church had a Holy Spirit-touched lifestyle. They won souls, they turned the world upside down. The secret was in their doctrine. It was different than ours. (see my "10 indictments" blogs for finishing this thought.)

Acknowledgement: Scott Schones, “A New Kind of Christian?” CD, Scroll Publishing

The Nashville Statement, and Questions About Whether They Express Love

 The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood released The Nashville Statement, a new Christian doctrinal missive on modern sexuality, in August 2017. Since its release, there’s been much controversy and confusion on the subject.Here is what you need to know.

The Nashville Statement, which was written by the members of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, a Louisville-based organization formed in 1987, is a Christian organization’s response to modern sexuality and how sexuality should be viewed through a biblical lens.

The statement expresses concern at the deteriorating reliance on God and faith and is comprised of 14 points covering issues from abstinence to traditional marriage to transgenderism — all based on a biblical understanding of human sexuality.

“As Western culture has become increasingly post-Christian,” the statement’s preamble begins, “it has embarked upon a massive revision of what it means to be a human being.”

“We are not our own,” it continues. “Our true identity, as male and female persons, is given by God. It is not only foolish, but hopeless, to try to make ourselves what God did not create us to be.”

• Article 1 affirms that God designed marriage to be between one man and one woman and says the institution is to be held as sacred as God’s relationship with His church. It goes on to say that homosexual or polygamous relationships were not designed by God, and thus, are not of God.
• Article 2 condemns infidelity and relationships outside the parameters of a Christian marriage.
• Article 3 states that Adam and Eve were created distinctly male and distinctly female and in God’s image, meaning that, despite their differences, men and women are equal in dignity and worth.
• Article 4 reiterates that differences between genders are what make God’s human creation unique and “are meant for human good and human flourishing.”
• Article 5 says that the differences between male and female reproductive organs are what determine the distinctions between the male and female genders and that “physical anomalies” or “psychological conditions” do not nullify God’s design for the two genders.
• Article 6 affirms that all men and women were created in God’s image and are equal in God’s eyes — including those born with a “physical disorder of sex development” Such disorders, the article says, do not make those afflicted incapable of obeying and walking with Christ.
• Article 7 tackles homosexual and transgender self-conceptions and states that male and female are designated only by God, for His holy purposes, according to Scripture.
• Article 8 says that same-sex attraction does not put “a person outside the hope of the gospel.”
• Article 9 condemns sexual immorality — whether heterosexual or homosexual — as a result of sin’s distortion of God’s intended purity and marital covenant.
• Article 10 states that approving transgenderism or homosexuality is sinful and a “departure from Christian faithfulness and witness.”
• Article 11 reminds Christians to speak the truth about sexuality in love to both men and women alike and to avoid speaking in a way that dishonors God’s design of His children.
• Article 12 speaks of God’s transformative power to change lives, professes that Christ can enable His followers to fight sinful desires those walking on a sinful path is absolute, and declares that God’s grace can forgive all sexual sins.
• Article 13 says that God’s grace enables people to forsake transgenderism and understand that they have been divinely created as male or female and that there is a “God-ordained link” between biological sex and gender self-conception.
• Article 14 affirms that Christ’s death and resurrection provides the opportunity for forgiveness of all sins and that no sinner is beyond God’s reach for salvation.

Who signed the Nashville Statement?

• John Piper, pastor, author, and chancellor of Bethlehem College & Seminary
  ● Russell Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission
  ● Francis Chan, best-selling author and pastor
  ● Dr. James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family
  ● Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council
  ● Dennis Rainey, founder and former president of FamilyLife
  ● Thom S. Rainier, president and CEO of LifeWay Christian Resources
  ● Christiana Holcomb, legal counsel at Alliance Defending Freedom
  ● Paul Nyquist, president of Moody Bible Institute

Others who signed the statement include Christian professors, authors, pastors, speakers, CEOs, magazine editors, counselors, and more.

Nashville, Tennessee, Mayor Megan Barry blasted the statement in a Tuesday tweet.  “The so-called ‘Nashville Statement’ is poorly named and does not represent the inclusive values of the city & people of Nashville.”

Civil rights activist DeRay McKesson wrote, “The God I know does not support the #NashvilleStatement.”

Pastor John Pavlovitz had a vulgar reference for the Nashville Statement. He wrote, “I have my own statement on the #Nashville Statement. It could be lots of words but honestly I could probably narrow it down to just a finger.”

Additionally, The Human Rights Campaign decried the statement as “a tool to discriminate against LGBTQ people.”  They added, “Faith should be welcoming and accepting.”

Greg Carey, Professor of the New Testament at Lancaster Theological Seminary, even penned an essay for The Huffington Post, in which he effectively called the Nashville Statement irrelevant.

“Why draft a big statement, and why publicize it?” Carey asked. “The answer is simple. Pretty much nobody cares what [the Christian right thinks] anymore. The day is past when the media seeks out right wing preachers to weigh in on social values. Their public audience shrinking, their public presence waning, and their credibility shot to hell, the Christian right needs attention.”

Despite these, the articles contained in the Nashville Statement are a simple declaration of Christian orthodoxy on human sexuality, sin, sexual orientation, and identity.

Those Christians who penned, signed, and distributed the statement are, like many Christians, unanimous in their belief that the Bible is the absolute Word of God and that, according to the Bible, God declares sexual immorality — to include homosexuality, transgenderism, infidelity, and more — sinful.

In the Bible, God has also stated that marriage is a covenant between a man and a woman and that any sexual relationship outside of the bonds marriage is sinful.

However, if you read the entire statement, nowhere does it call for governmental, societal, or even religious intervention against those who disagree with the missive — it simply expresses the Bible’s views and offers God’s love and acceptance for all, regardless of their human behaviors.

Matt Walsh’s Take

Outrage erupted this week when a group of Evangelical leaders released what is being called the Nashville Statement..

I am thrilled that this was published and I applaud the Christian leaders who signed it. The basic principles espoused are right, good, and fundamental. They’re rooted in Scripture and consistent with what Christianity has taught for 2,000 years.

The Nashville Statement is, in
a word, redundant. But its redundancy by no means renders it unnecessary. To the contrary, though these concepts are as old as time and well known to any half-serious Christian, we live in a society where they must be shouted from the rooftop again and again and again. Every Christian leader, if he is to consider himself a Christian leader, must be clear and unequivocal. Many Christians could not tell you how their own pastors feel about this subject, because they’ve never once heard it addressed (I have attended many such churches). This is a shame and a scandal, and it explains why many of those same Christians eventually come to the conclusion that matters of sexual morality are unimportant, and a Christian is free to decide for himself what is acceptable and what is not.

St. Paul proclaimed that he is “not ashamed of the Gospel because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes,” yet a significant number of pastors, priests, and Christian scholars have revealed themselves to be profoundly ashamed of it. So, as the throngs of unbelievers lash out at the signers, these “progressive” Christians peeked out of their hiding places to admonish those who wrote it and those who agree with it for their lack of “love.” They sensed another opportunity to score points with the world by condemning Biblical truths as “unloving,” and they took it, like they always do.

As just one example, an alleged priest named Father James Martin responded with some sweet and sappy declarations of his own, meant to counteract the terrible and bigoted Nashville Statement. He proclaimed that “LGBT people are some of the holiest people I know” and that “God loves LGBT people,” etc. Yes, obviously it’s true that God loves LGBT people, but the clear insinuation is that one cannot believe God loves LGBT people and also affirm Biblical teachings on sexual morality. He sets up a false choice between love and truth. This is the game that Satan plays in our culture, and men like James Martin are more than happy to be his pawns in it.

Indeed, the Martins of the world are far more dangerous than blatant heretics. To my knowledge, Martin has never flat out said that the Bible is wrong in its teachings on sexual morality. Rather, he shouts down any conversation about sexual morality by insisting that God loves gay people, as if anyone has disagreed with that notion. This is the most common method employed by the “Christian leaders” who wish to pervert and destroy Christianity from within. Instead of publicly contradicting Christian teachings about sexuality and gender, they simply refuse to discuss the subject except to proclaim that God loves everyone regardless of what they do in the bedroom. This is supposed to be the “loving” approach.

It isn’t.

It’s the coward’s approach. The traitorous approach. The selfish approach. The most efficient approach for ensuring that as many people as possible remain in their sin as they slide into Hell. I won’t call it hateful. It’s worse than hateful. It’s indifferent. What most defines “progressive” Christianity is its utter indifference to the fate of human souls. It abandons sinners to their sin. It leaves them in their confusion and intentionally feeds into the lies they tell themselves.

It is perhaps the worst thing that has happened on Earth since the Fall, because it has packed Hell so full that I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a waiting list to get in the door. The greatest things become the worst when they are corrupted. Satan was the highest angel in Heaven before he became the ruler of Hell. Christianity — stripped of its truth, refashioned to encourage the very sins Christ died to free us from — turns into a kind of elevator transporting souls quickly and directly into the eternal fire. Loving? This sort of “love” will be little comfort down there.

The Nashville Statement is truly loving because it is truly Christian. It is a thousand times more loving than any pointless, crowd pleasing sermon about tolerance and inclusivity. In relaying a few fundamental truths in a plain and uncompromising way, it loves by shedding light into the darkness. That, after all, is what love ought to do. There is no other kind of love.

Acknowledgement:  Glenn Beck and Matt Walsh

Corrupting God's Image Through DNA, More Proof of an End-Times Sign

 You may recall my blog on DNA (just after last Christmas), how in Genesis 6:1-4, during the time of Noah, I proved, Scripturally, that those verses speak of fallen angels who took on the form of men and married women, and had sex with them.  This was a violation of God’s law, since an angel’s seed and DNA was celestial (and immortal), but her ovum and DNA were earthly. So their babies were not truly human; they were not in the image of God—they were a perverted hybrid of angel and human.  Genesis 6:4, using the New International Version, calls their children “Nephilim,” a Hebrew word.  This was translated “giants” in some Bibles, but the word means “fallen.”  Their children were, as Scripture shows, huge men.

Nine hundred  years after Noah, it happened again, on a lesser scale--there was a  member of the tribe of Rephaim (the word means "giants") named Og of Bashan. He was called, in Deuteronomy 3:11, the “last of the giants.” He had a bed that was iron and was 9 cubits deep.  Assuming Moses, the writer of Deuteronomy, used the measure he was familiar with, the Egyptian royal cubit of 20.63 inches, the bed was 15-1/2 feet deep.  So he was likely close to 14 feet tall.  Using a weight-to-height ratio (first created by Galileo) for men, his weight was estimated at 3,125 pounds.  This explains why, 40 years before Og, when the Hebrews were spying in Canaanite lands, they came away frightened, even suggesting not attacking the Anakites (Numbers 13 is the record of this).  We speculate that it wasn't because they were cowards (although they lacked faith in God's power); we feel that they meant what they said when they said “we were like grasshoppers in their sight.”  Several whole tribes were giants.  This means there was another invasion of earth by fallen angels, like in Noah’s day some 900 years before.  Scripture hints at it in Genesis 6:4 when it says:  "There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward..."

Back in Noah’s time, we suspect that the giant Nephilim were generally considered demigods;  Scripture called them “mighty men of renown”, and they likely led people into more violence and more sexual immorality.  The violence would come from the nations that had some of these men would try to conquer their shorter neighbors, for booty.  And the immorality?  It would be easy to suspect that the women would be attracted.  The Nephilim  had sex with possibly many women--the prospect of sex with a 10 or 15-foot tall man might have been a great curiosity and turn-on for the women (there are plenty of other verses about perverse sexual immorality being the order of the day in Canaan--which you can imagine by their types of gods).  Many scholars believe the children of the fallen angels were demonic (they had disobeyed God and were corrupting the human race, a goal of Satan).  After all, these were children that weren’t really human, but a hybrid of human and a demonic fallen angel.  The earth, over time, likely became filled with “people” who had some fraction of demonic DNA in them.  It's even possible that a complete tainting of humanity was possible, since people consistently lived over 800 years, and the astounding extension of procreation makes the spread of gene corruption skyrocket.  (When AIDS was the “talk of the town” in the 1980s, we read repeatedly how fast sexually transmitted disease travels, even among us limited-age humans).  In Noah's time, God was fed up with this evil, as Genesis 6 records, and His flood killed every single soul on the earth except eight—Noah and his immediate family. Was God capricious for killing millions of people?  Don't forget, the huge number of people indulging in this deviancy had been the result of rejecting God’s image of a human, preferring the demonic image of a hybrid.  It’s possible the majority of people who were not really human were not even redeemable for  heaven. For further proof, note that Noah, in building the ark, preached countless times of the great judgment to come for a massive number of curious onlookers (wouldn't everyone nearby want to see a massive boat on land?)—yet he converted not a single soul, or else they would have been on the ark.  Note also the greatest compliment God has for Noah's family—in Genesis 6:9, he was “perfect in his generations.”  The word "perfect" is not a word of morality; it is a word of physical perfection--or DNA perfection. There was no demonic  hybrid in him.  That fact was evidently rare.  When man took on demonic DNA—he chose ultra-violent and evil lifestyles, not redeemable, and not human.  This is what God wiped out.

In that blog I also made a connection to the End Times, pointing out that recent science has been able to change and merge DNA again, and how this could be corrupted by men for wrong uses.  I also pointed out what Jesus said in prophecy (Matthew 24:38,39). Paraphrased, it was: “As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be again,”—in the end times.  Well, after reading a fascinating book by Douglas Hamp, “Corrupting the Image,” I have some follow-up that would do you well to stretch your mind and consider.

Hamp anchors his thesis on Genesis 3:15:

And I will put enmity between you and the woman, And between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, And you shall bruise His heel.”

The enmity comes from this:  The woman’s Seed (capital "S," in decent Bibles) refers to Christ—and “your” (at this point He was speaking to the serpent’s, or devil’s) seed then refers to the opposite, which has to be the antichrist (in many Scriptures, I John 2:22 for instance).  As Christ is the Son of God, the devil’s DNA is passed to his own son, the antichrist.   The antichrist was later called “the Beast” (Revelation 13:3b-6), I suspect, because he wasn’t really human, but even possibly a hybrid of Satan and human. The devil manages to wound Christ, a heel wound (at the crucifixion), but Christ is victorious in resurrection, and will eventually kill the serpent and his seed, once and for all. His final crushing blow to the head comes in the end times. Thus Genesis 3:15, since it comments on the antichrist, is not only a promise of a redeemer, but also an end-times prophecy.
The word “seed” needs a scientific explanation.  When a male and female “know” each other (Biblically), his seed, which in the Greek is “sperma,” combines with her seed, the ovum, the egg—and a baby is miraculously fused.  At this point, it’s called a “zygote.”  But seed is really DNA at its core.  Thus, his 23 unique chromosomes with DNA combine with her 23 unique chromosomes, with DNA, to form 46, in 23 pairs, and a baby is conceived.
At this point Mr. Hamp (whose book I am summarizing) makes some very interesting points. A little background:  Adam and Eve were created perfect (Genesis 1:31)—that means their DNA was “coded” perfectly (since that’s mainly what DNA is).  They were supposed to be pure, and immortal.  But due to Adam’s sin, he was punished with two things:  death, and a tendency to sin. This was called “original sin” by theologians.  Both of these characteristics (death and tendency to sin) were passed on to the entire race of humankind.

Now, to take this a step further:  Based on scientific study (recorded in “Science Spectra #14, 1998”), the Y chromosome, passed from father to son, is an exact copy of the same one from generation to generation.  That means every male today has the same Y chromosome as Adam.   It was also found that the Y contains the record of an “event” in the lifetime of our original father, since some of the DNA coding appears scrambled or lost.  We can surmise that all our DNA through
all generations are likewise corrupted. Mr. Hamp muses, what if that “event” was the fall of Adam? What if God’s punishment of the original sin, the death, the tendency to sin--was His corruption of that Y chromosome?  Perhaps that’s the tangible record of original sin, that keeps going on, and on, through all generations.  That explains how the effects of the sin of Adam get passed down through history—and how we have the same curse of death, and the tendency to sin, that he had.
But….what chromosome did Jesus not have?  The corrupted Y chromosome—because His father was not Joseph, a man, but God (Matthew 1:18).  Mary’s egg fused with seed from the Holy Spirit.  So Jesus did not inherit the Y chromosome from a man, so He did not have original sin, like all of us. That’s why He is called the “only begotten” Son of God (John 1:18).  Now if you argue that because of this, Jesus could not sin, you’d be wrong.  He had the physical weaknesses of humankind—like us, He had to respond to threats, to torture, to famine, to scorn.  But like beginning Adam, He had a choice--not a tendency, a choice--to sin, or not to sin, in each case.  He chose not to sin all the way down His human life.  So His perfection was acceptable to the Father—and He became our Lamb of sacrifice, of substitution, paying for our sin—as a ransom to free us—if we trust Him.

So we figure that fallen angels, or demons, were trying to destroy God’s image in Noah’s time.  But despite their demonic giant children being wiped out in the Flood, giants reappear nine hundred years later in the Anakim and the Rephaim tribes in the Old Testament (Deut. 2:11, 3:11 AMP), as we saw in my discussion above. That demonic corruption led people into the worst of idolatry, with sacrifices of children to their gods the worst example.  So as long as we still have the Rephaim, and Og, and other tribes of Nephilim all throughout Canaan,  God again had to resort to a brutal answer; He told Joshua to kill every member, men, women, and children, of their seven nations in Canaan, who evidently all had fast-spreading demonic DNA (Deut.20:16-18).  But Joshua did not complete the job.  There were still a few giants again, who reproduced, such as Goliath, who appears another 400 years later, and was estimated to be over 10 feet tall.
So, looking at Genesis 6:4 again:

There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward,
if we keep in mind that this indicates that the “sons of God” (the immortal angels who rebelled and became immortal demonic angels) would be operating “afterward” as well to try to corrupt God’s image, these later appearances mean they were still invading our civilization several times over.  My point is, What’s to keep them from not trying similar tricks again today?  Here’s where the theories get wild, so hang on to your seats.  Mr. Hamp has a new interpretation of a verse.  He believes that Daniel 2:43 (when Daniel interprets Nebuchadnezzar’s dream of the image of four kingdoms) contains a telltale phrase for the fourth beast, the one during the Last Days.  Here is the verse, with my underlines:

As you saw iron mixed with ceramic clay, they will mingle with the seed of men; but they will not adhere to one another, just as iron does not mix with clay

He says this future will be dominated by a person who is so sold out to the devil that he will genetically be the son of Satan. (Thus Satan will counterfeit Jesus the Son of God).  Satan’s genetic son then becomes the antichrist.  With Satan’s intellectual genius and huge abilities to plan and deceive in the antichrist’s DNA, the antichrist will defeat earthly kingdoms, military or politically, and earn the worship of an admiring public as he rises to the top of the world’s military dictators.  Mr. Hamp believes that the words “mix,” or “mingle with the seed of men,” refers to another future invasion of demons  into our population, again producing demonic/human hybrid children, again fouling our DNA, again making people not human, not carrying God’s image—and leading them into gross violence, idolatry, and evil--like it was in Noah's time, it will happen again (as Jesus said, Matthew 24:37).
Here's where Mr. Hamp's theories get "out there." He believes the antichrist will make his greatest deception ever, in an area you wouldn't believe. We’ve all heard of UFOs.  An intelligent person would not think seriously about them, right?  Wrong.  Please read these testimonials:  Captain Edgar Mitchell, Apollo 14 astronaut, said “We all know that UFOs are real.  All we need to ask is where do they come from?” Ronald Reagan said in a 1987 speech to the U.N, no less, that an alien force (he didn't mean migrants) was among us.  In 1966 Gerald Ford recommended an official investigation of UFOs.  Jimmy Carter said he had seen one in 1976.  General Douglas MacArthur admitted in 1955 that the next war will be an interplanetary war.  And the list goes on.  (See pp. 189-194 of Hamp’s book).  Well, Mr. Hamp would like to suggest an answer to Capt. Mitchell’s “where from” question:  UFOs are demons camouflaged to be "aliens." Keep in mind, they are able to move through dimensions—from spiritual to our four dimensions.  Mr. Hamp is convinced that this whole planned UFO arrival is designed so the antichrist will announce to humanity that we were "seeded" by advanced life on other planets.  Perhaps they will say they abandoned us, because we have this strange religion, "Christianity," and those Christians do not believe in the evolution of man. Those Christians are not optimists about man’s nature or future.  The antichrist will introduce some aliens (really demons) for worldwide TV viewing.  They will be light-emitting geniuses with special powers—powers that he will show off (II Thess. 2:9).  If you want these fabulous powers, if you want to evolve into transhumanism, just come in for an injection of his recombinant DNA, take the mark as proof, and you will have the power to evolve into something beyond your earth's limited pleasures. He will even declare eventually that he is God, and we can become gods too (II Thess. 2:3-4). (Later, when some people are leery of doing it, he will suggest that Christians so limit man's horizons that we'll punish them: you won’t be able to buy anything unless you take the DNA and mark.)  But the truth is, if you do it, you will have taken on demon DNA.  You are no longer human.  You have rejected God’s image.  So you will be destined for hell, the same harsh treatment that earlier rebellious Nephilim generations got.  God says so in Revelation 13:17, 14:9-12:

…no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast…Then a third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand, ¹⁰ he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. ¹¹ And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name.” ¹² Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.

Well, I am not sure what to think about his UFO theory, but it is possible to weave such a story with UFOs, even to tempt saints if they have to go through the tribulation of the last days before rapture as I believe.  Families could be pulled apart, with some members yielding to the temptation of evolution into special powers, into acceptance—while other members reject it as against Scriptural commands—and having their life persecuted.  Despite this paper's wildness, we never know the future's details.  Far-out other theories have been soberly put forth--witness the fear of AI (artificial intelligence) by some of the world’s most brilliant minds, such as Elon Musk and Bill Gates (at the Vanity Fair summit, also studied on Glenn Beck). Musk says about the headlong AI research, “we are summoning the demon.”

It is certainly true, above all else, that we must avoid the mark of the antichrist. When the “Beast” shuts off buying unless you take his mark, it will be a huge temptation for those who simply want to feed themselves or their family.  It will take patience and faith in Jesus, who can perform miracles for us.  Just keep looking at the big picture:  Christ is the winning side in this global battle (Rev. 19:19-21). We cannot give our body to the devil’s keeping, no matter how glorious that makes us, if we would at the same time be giving our soul to hell—for eternity.  If you’re a rational person, just answer this:  Which is more important?  A short-term pain of you possibly sacrificing your body at the end, or an eternal pain of fire and brimstone in hell?  Choose carefully.

Acknowledgement:  Corrupting the Image, book by Douglas Hamp, 2011