But before I leave the subject, let me point you to a masterful resource of material concerning my view. Sam Waldron, noted Reformed Baptist (and Southern Baptist, SBC), posted a series of articles in response to John MacArthur’s now-infamous sermon on Eschatology at the 2007 Shepherd’s Conference. Links to the entire series of articles are below.

Let me encourage you, no matter what your position may be, to check out at least a few of the articles below. I have arranged them by their title so that you can read about the issue you personally question with the most. I assure you that Waldron rightly deals with and refutes the many accusations of a ’spiritual hermeneutic’ and ‘not taking things literally’, etc., that often come from those who simply do not fully understand the non-millennium position. I have not seen a response or rebuttal to any of these articles, so if any of my readers happen to know of something, please let me know.

The overall title of this series is “MacArthur’s Millennial Manifesto“

• MacArthur’s Millennial Manifesto: Chapter 1–John MacArthur Is My Friend!

• MacArthur’s Millennial Manifesto Chapter Two

• Chapter One–Supplementary Excursus

• Chapter 3: MacArthur Versus Church History!

• Transcript of His Message
• Chapter 4–Not Your Father’s Amillennialism

• Chapter 5: The Israel of God!–Introduction

• Chapter 5: The Israel of God!–Galatians 6:16

• Chapter 5: The Israel of God!–Romans 9:6

• Chapter 5: The Israel of God!–1 Corinthians 10:18; 12:2

• Chapter 5: The Israel of God!–Ephesians 2:11-19

• Chapter 5: The Israel of God!—Conclusion

• Chapter 6: Who’s a Spiritualizer?–Introduction

• Chapter 6: Who’s a Spiritualizer?—Literal, Normal, Factual, Face-Value, Specific Interpretation

• Chapter 6: Who’s a Spiritualizer?—The Case of Genesis 1-3

• Chapter 6: Who’s a Spiritualizer?—”Literal Hermeneutics”

• Chapter 6: Who’s a Spiritualizer?—The Literal Truth about the Church Being Israel

• Chapter 6: Who’s a Spiritualizer?—The Church as the Elect Remnant of Israel

• Chapter 6: Who’s a Spiritualizer?—Must Israelites be Ethnic Jews?

• Chapter 6: Who’s a Spiritualizer?—Conclusion

• Chapter 7: Why doesn’t the Church as the Israel of God inherit Israel’s curses as well as its blessings?

• Chapter 8: Of Jewish Evangelism

• Chapter 9: Together for the Gospel?–Zeal according to knowledge?

• Chapter 9: Together for the Gospel?–Of Panmillennialism and Hyper-Preterism!

• Chapter 9: Together for the Gospel?–Is there an issue in the house?

Considering the issue of Eschatology, I am surprised at how many solid, Christian leaders and laymen dismiss the issue as irrelevant just because it requires a great deal of personal study. Rare is it to find pastors now-days who can clearly articulate their position on the issues, much less interact with opposing viewpoints and the scriptures that suggest otherwise. Are the issues and scriptures confusing and hard to understand? Definitely so. Does it require a great deal of time studying and wrestling with texts? No doubt. But this, my brothers, is no excuse for ignorance. We are talking about our future hope, eternity, and the Word of God concerning such things. These things cannot be written off as a ‘issue of hermeneutics’, or ‘I just take things literally’, or even ‘I’ll all work out in the end’. No, please, don’t stoop to these sort of cop-outs.

Accordingly, this subject, and our position on it, has direct implications on our faith, our hope, and yes, in every day life. Are we looking out for what is going on in Israel? Are we to fight for the rights of Christians? Should we support Israel in their military endeavors? But ultimately, are we looking forward to the final Day, the judgment, and the new heavens and the new earth, or are we looking for a temporal, secular, earthly kingdom which will temporary reign in the spiritual and political realm?

These are some important issues to consider; issues that will not be covered today. Instead, I pray that you would take the matter of eschatology and practical, every day life, very seriously.

So today I would like us to consider the thesis of this blog, shepherding the flock, the discipleship of others, and how it directly intersects with the Second Coming of Christ.

Consider Matthew 24:36 – 51, and take special note a few things:

• Jesus, concerning the date of His Second Coming to earth, says that ‘no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only.’
• However, our practical application to this statement is given in verse 44: ‘Therefore you also must be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.’

The message is: The date has not been revealed, but it will surprise everyone, and we are to always BE READY for His appearing. This is called the Doctrine of Imminency.

Next, we see Jesus continue teaching on this subject, and He states:

“Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom his master has set over his household, to give them their food at the proper time? Blessed is that servant whom his master will find so doing when he comes.”

So then:

• We have been given a stewardship and a duty to perform while our Master is away.
• Blessed are we who will be in the midst of obeying those duties upon His great and unexpected return.

Thus, how are we to be ready? What is the duty that Jesus prescribes in this passage?

“to give them (the household) their food at the proper time”

Brethren, if you are a believer, you have a responsibility to feed and care for those of the Master’s household. It is no wonder that Jesus told Peter three times to ‘feed My lambs’, ‘tend My sheep’, and ‘feed My sheep’. You see, we are never more like Christ than when we are serving others. Jesus certainly served us; who are we to neglect to mimic His behavior and serve others?

You may not be a pastor, elder, teacher, or anything of the sort, but there is no question that you have someone in your life who you can shepherd, feed, and ultimately serve. Serve your wife, your children, the little kid next door, your fellow employees, your parents, your pastor, etc.

Mark my words: this is the only chance you will ever have to serve others. Yeah, my eschatology plays a role in this, for there will be no millennium to serve others in. There will be no second chances here on earth with some supposed earthly kingdom. There will be nothing, nothing, but ‘the end’ once Christ appears in the clouds. However, your eschatology plays a role in this as well –whether you admit so or not. Maybe you’re so stuck on Israel and the trouble that is constantly brewing that you believe it will all be over soon anyway, so what’s the use? Maybe you’re so fixated on times and seasons, marks of the beast and earthquakes, that you forget that Christ has called us to obey, not to try and decipher the date of His coming.

The bottom line is that Christians were saved to serve; to feed others with the good news of Jesus Christ. I encourage you to go out and do what Jesus has called you to do.

“Blessed is that servant whom his master will find so doing when he comes.”

Please note that my answers will be brief and in an outline type of form, as a full treatment of each subject is not my intention. I will be glad to answer questions or to point you to further material on the subject upon request.

The first question is:

How many peoples of God are there? That is, does God have two different plans for two different groups of people? Do not the scriptures teach of one bride, one flock, one church, one faith? What do the scriptures say? (Not the systems)

Before reading, please note that:

• Dispensationalism is a very complex and in-depth subject which cannot be fully dealt with here.
• Today I am simply tackling Dispensationalism as it directly relates to what the New Testament teaches concerning the subject. My purpose it not to ignore the Old Testament passages in this discussion. However, I am under the conviction that Jesus, Paul, and the Apostles had a correct understanding of OT eschatology, and that their writings on the subject clearly contradict today’s systems which relay almost exclusively on OT scripture.

Are there two plans/two peoples of God? Or, most specifically, does God have a separate, distinct, and special plan for the nation of Israel which the Gentile Church will not participate in?

• Scan the New Testament passages on Christ’s second coming and the end of the age, and you will not find any references to a restoration of the nation of Israel.
  • Instead of mentioning different races of people, Jesus and the Apostles instead refer constantly to the good and evil, just and unjust, etc.
  • Some use Romans 11:26, but the passage speaks nothing of the sort. The nation isn’t mentioned (as in a political power), a kingdom isn’t mentioned, a temple…the land…etc. isn’t mentioned. The end of the age and Christ’s second coming isn’t even mentioned! Simply put, whatever your take on that passage, it clearly cannot be used as a verse that teaches anything but spiritual regeneration.
  • Paul taught extensively on the second coming in 1st and 2nd Thessalonians, but he never points his audience to any national promises, earthly kingdoms, or glorious future for the Jewish race. Neither did Jesus or any other of the Apostles. Instead, they clearly taught that Gentiles were joint heirs to the OT promises of God, and that in Christ all of the promises are ‘yes and amen’.

  
  

• Interestingly enough, Jesus and the Apostles seem to depict the nation of Israel in the negative light at the end of the age, and not in a positive manner.
  • “the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness. – Matt 8:12
  • “I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits.” – Matt 21:43
  • “Go out to the highways and hedges and compel people to come in, that my house may be filled. For I tell you, none of those men who were invited shall taste my banquet.” – Luke 14:23
  • “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me, but weep for yourselves and for your children.” – Luke 23:28
  • “I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh. They are Israelites..” – Rom 9 (If Israel had a glorious future, why would Paul say such things?)

  
  

• But why does the Old Testament continually teach a restoration of the nation Israel, complete with a rebuilt Temple, renewed sacrificial system/priesthood?
  • Clearly, the nation of Israel was a type and a shadow of the people of God, chronicled in scripture for our example and instruction.
  • More specifically, the new testament teaches us that Gentiles are recipients of the promises given to Israel in the Old Testament, and the Apostles clearly instructed the church on eschatology with this foundational principle in place:
    • Gentiles have been grafted in to the olive tree, Israel. Rom 11
    • Paul teaches us that through faith in Christ we are ‘Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.’ – Gal 3
    • Jesus teaches us that there is ‘one flock, one Shepherd.’ – John 10
    • Peter says that we Gentiles ‘are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession’. – 1 Peter 2:0
    • Hebrews 8 refers back to the Old Testament promise of the New Covenant, and directly applies it to the New Covenant Church.
    • Paul declares the true Jews are circumcised in heart (Rom 2:29), and elsewhere instructs the Colossians that ‘In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ.’ – Col 2
    • Paul refers to Gentile Christians as the ‘true circumcision’, in Phil 3.

Conclusion:

The New Testament is not short on eschatological instruction, and we must be diligent in understanding that the OT cannot and will not contradict what the NT clearly teaches. So before my dispensational brethren jump all over me for this post, the force of my argument here cannot be fully understood outside of answering the remaining 6 questions I set forth last week. If I am wrong on this question, then we should expect me to have a whole lot of trouble on the remaining 6.

Accordingly, if the New Testament teaches us that there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, and that the dividing wall separating Jews and Gentiles has been broken down and abolished, who are we to run back to the Old Testament and reinstitute these distinctions into the promises of God?

Thus, I believe it is safe to say that most of my readers know and understand that scripture teaches that the distinction between Jew and Gentile has been broken down with Christ. All who are in Christ through faith are a part of the true Israel, that is, the ‘holy nation’ of God, and that dividing up different races in the eschatological future is not the teaching of scripture, neither Old or New.

Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called “the uncircumcision” by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands— 12 remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility 15 by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, 16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. – Eph 2

A few weeks ago my wife came home from a women’s bible study at the church we are currently attending (and about to join) and enthusiastically wanted to talk to me about some of the things they discussed. They are currently studying the second coming of Christ, and the teacher had started the study by posting a few questions to ponder, with more discussion to follow in the weeks to come. My wife wanted to go through each question with me, but before I conceded I asked her, “What position do you hold?” She looked up and said, “I don’t know, but I definitely know that I am not a premillennialist.”

It is my hope that you too will consider the questions below and the scriptural ramifications of each one. Essentially, these questions ‘cut to the chase’, and leave behind all of the story-book interpretations of Revelation 20 (Left Behind), the symbolic nature of the book of Revelation, the traditions of men and denominations, the adherence to the teachings of a favorite preacher over the Word of God, and the highly-contradictory exclamations of taking things ‘literaly’. If you are interested in the truth, these questions will lead you to it. If you are not, then these questions will probably frustrate you, as they will expose the holes that are in every man-made system of eschatology.

1. How many peoples of God are there? That is, does God have two different plans for two different groups of people? Do not the scriptures teach of one bride, one flock, one church, one faith? What do the scriptures say? (Not the systems)
2. How many Second Comings of Christ will there be? Do the scriptures teach of one final Day, one final trumpet, one appearing of our Lord, or is there more than one of each of these? What do the scriptures say? (Not the systems)
3. How many resurrections will there be? When the scriptures teach of the resurrection, do they speak of multiple resurrections taking place at multiple points in history? What do the scriptures say? (Not the systems)
4. How many judgments will there be? When the scriptures teach of the judgment, do they speak of multiple judgments taking place at multiple points in history? What do the scriptures say? (Not the systems)
5. Will Christ return at the last trumpet on the last hour of the last Day of this present age, or will He return 1,000 years before the last hour of the last Day of this present age? (In other words, does Scripture teach that Christ’s return will inaugurate the age that is to come, or will it inaugurate the final era of this present age?) What do the scriptures say? (Not the systems)
6. Will physical birth and physical death continue to occur after Christ’s Second Coming? Will physical life, death, and creation as we know it continue after the appearance of Christ in the clouds? (Don’t you think I Cor. 15 would deal with this (24-26)? What do the scriptures say? (Not the systems)
7. Can men be savingly converted after Christ’s Second Coming? What do the scriptures say? (Not the systems)

My friends, if you look to the plain, literal, clear, precise teaching of the New Testament on these matters, and for the moment lay aside the tough language of Old Testament prophecies and tough symbolic language of Revelation 20, you will no doubt see the truth of God’s Word in the matter. Then, when you go back to the tough passages, the eyes of your understanding being enlightened by the proper perspective, the truth will be as plain as day. I trust you will do so, and find these ‘cut to the chase’ questions (which did not originate with me) to be a blessing in your own life as you try to sort through the plethora of teaching out there on the end times.

Clearly, the arena where this particular debate is prominent is in the discussion of eschatology. The use of symbolism is one of the main tenants of the prophetic writings in scripture, and so disagreements in eschatology are bound to lead to one side claiming to be more ‘literal’ than the other side.

Today, however, I just want you to consider what definition we can prescribe to the phrase ‘literal interpretation’. Consider a few words of Jesus:

“Watch and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.”

“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.”

“If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away…And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away.”

“If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.”

Now, I ask my friends, what is the ‘literal’ interpretation of these texts? If I argue that Jesus isn’t really teaching us to dismember ourselves in the case of sin, or that He isn’t really saying that we must physically eat His physical body, would I be labeled a ‘liberal’ or one who ‘spiritualizes’ the text? Obviously not.

However, we would be wrong to say that there isn’t a real, ‘literal’ interpretation of these texts. Take the first one as an example:

“Watch and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.”

Upon Jesus first saying this to the disciples, they didn’t have a clue what He meant. But Jesus, aware of their misunderstanding, states:

“O you of little faith, why are you discussing among yourselves the fact that you have no bread? Do you not yet perceive?… How is it that you fail to understand that I did not speak about bread? Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” Then they understood that he did not tell them to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees.”

You see, there was a real and ‘literal’ meaning to Jesus’ words, but that meaning was not found on purely mechanical or academic interpretation of His ‘literal’ words. What does Jesus point to as the reason why the disciples misunderstood? “Oh you of little FAITH”.

One more example will suffice for my argument. Consider Malachi 4:5:

“Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and awesome day of the Lord comes.”

Now consider the fulfillment of this prophecy, by the direct teaching of Jesus:

“And the disciples asked him, “Then why do the scribes say that first Elijah must come?” He answered, “Elijah does come, and he will restore all things. But I tell you that Elijah has already come, and they did not recognize him…”

Earlier in the gospel of Matthew Jesus had said:

“For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John, and if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah who is to come. He who has ears to hear, let him hear.”

Notice a few things about these texts:

• A ‘literal’ interpretation of Malachi 4:5 caused the Jews to miss the fulfillment of that prophecy (and, I might add, a ‘literal’ interpretation of the OT prophecies caused the Jews to completely miss their Messiah).
• Jesus told the disciples that ‘He who has ears to hear, let him hear’, which is a direct reference to the gift of wisdom that is given by God alone.
• Jesus says ‘if you are willing to accept it’, again, I believe, noting that belief in the fulfillment wasn’t a matter of ‘literal’ or ‘spiritual’ interpretation of a set of words, but a matter of faith, given of course to those with ears to hear.

Therefore, interpretation of scripture is a matter of faith and wisdom, just as much as it is a matter of words and sentences. Faith and wisdom, of course, are gifts from God and not something we possess naturally in our nature. Biblical interpretation is not entering a formula into a machine and having it automatically spit out the interpretation!

Does that mean we have a right to spiritualize the text? No! Do we have the right to force allegories wherever we deem necessary? Certainly not. Does that mean that when the scriptures speak with symbolism, that we have the right to interpret it just any way we please? Emphatically, no! But it does mean that taking a dictionary and defining the words, and then constructing the sentence with the proper rules of Greek grammar, does not promise that your interpretation will always be the right one!

Thus, lest I be misunderstood, I close with a few points of consideration:

• It should be a given fact that scripture interprets scripture, and that wisdom, given by the Spirit, aides us in understanding the depth of a book that is inexhaustible to our human minds.
• Even when words and sentences do not ‘literally’ or ‘at face value’ give the specific meaning of the text, they will never contradict the words themselves, the context, or more importantly, other scriptures.
• There is a real, ‘literal’ meaning behind each and every text of scripture, but that meaning isn’t always communicated by black words on white paper.
• We must be wise to determine when and where scripture uses symbols to communicate truth. I am prepared to argue that prophetic literature has a tendency to do this almost always.
• We must use other scripture as our chief method of interpretation when we suspect that symbolism is being used in a biblical text.
• We cannot ‘just decide’ the meaning of a symbolic text (I have in mind here the typical style of Revelation); we are chiefly bound to what the rest of scripture teaches in a particular area (and to other rules as well, of course).

Now, I can’t possibly leave this post without an example of prophetic literature, one that Sam Waldron recently used (and an excellent article I might add):

Revelation 13:1 – “And the dragon stood on the sand of the seashore. Then I saw a beast coming up out of the sea, having ten horns and seven heads, and on his horns were ten diadems, and on his heads were blasphemous names.”

I believe that the Dispensationalist teachers who taught me the literal wherever possible view would have without exception understood this text symbolically. I suppose they must have argued that that such an assertion as is found in Revelation 13:1 is not literally possible. But today I have the sense (and perhaps the audacity) to ask, Why not? What is so impossible about taking this verse with strict literality? Is it not possible for God to create dragons and beasts with ten horns and seven heads? I think it is possible. Thus, the literal wherever possible hermeneutic does not satisfy the needs of this text or properly qualify literal interpretation.

If you are a Premillennialist (whether Dispensationalist or not), there are several things you must necessarily believe:

-You must necessarily believe that physical death will continue to exist beyond the time of Christ’s second coming.

-You must necessarily believe that the natural creation will continue, beyond the time of Christ’s second coming, to be subjected to the curse imposed by the fall of man.

-You must necessarily believe that the New Heavens and New Earth will not be introduced until 1,000 years subsequent to the return of Christ.

-You must necessarily believe that unbelieving men and women will still have the opportunity to come to saving faith in Christ for at least 1,000 years subsequent to his return.

-You must necessarily believe that unbelievers will not be finally resurrected until at least 1,000 years subsequent to the return of Christ.

-You must necessarily believe that unbelievers will not be finally judged and cast into eternal punishment until at least 1,000 years subsequent to the return of Christ.

Amillennialists don’t see these beliefs being taught in Scripture.

-Sam Storms (From Monergism.com’s page on Dispensationalism/Premillennialism)

2 Peter 3: “This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved. In both of them I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder, that you should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles, knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.” For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.

But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed.“

Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of people ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness, waiting for and hastening the rapture…

Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of people ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness, waiting for and hastening the thousand year reign of Christ on earth…

“Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of people ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness,waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be set on fire and dissolved, and the heavenly bodies will melt as they burn!”

But according to his promise we are waiting for the rapture, and the thousand year reign on earth…

“But according to his promise we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.“

The men of Nineveh will rise up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is here. The queen of the South will rise up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, and behold, something greater than Solomon is here. – Matthew 12:41-42

Reader, I ask just one simple question from this text: does the resurrection of the righteous (believers in Christ), and the resurrection of the unrighteous (unbelievers), happen at the same time, or at two completely different points in redemptive history?

Before you answer, consider just a few other texts straight from the mouth of our Lord:

• And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. – John 6:39
• For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. – John 6:40
• No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. – John 6:44
• Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. – John 6:54

Simply put, there is a very popular teaching in this day and age called Premillennialism. This teaching affirms that the righteous are raised before a supposed 1000year reign of Jesus Christ here on earth, and that the unrighteous are not raised until this period has ended. Throw a loop into this view of the resurrection(s), and premillennialism suffers a mortal wound.

Clearly, from the text itself (and from many other texts not mentioned here), the righteous are raised with the wicked, at the judgment, on the last day.

If more people would simply recognize this crystal-clear teaching from scripture, many disagreements, doctrinal errors, fancied interpretations of Revelation, and left-behind books would soon disappear. But most of all, our Lord would be more truly glorified as He has revealed Himself in scripture, and our eyes would be lifted up to heaven, instead of down to some plot of temporal land here on earth (Jerusalem).

I’ve been reading Foxe’s Book of Martyrs recently, and it has had a great impact on how I view the world in which we now live in. Trust me, reading of the horrific tortures and deaths that took place year after year during the first 1500 years or so of the church will certainly change your perspective too.

What I’ve come to realize is this:

• Christians have it better now -in all parts of the world, than we’ve ever, ever had it before. This is an undeniable fact.
• Christians, like myself, take our freedom to practice Christianity so much for granted, that we have almost stopped practicing true Christianity.
• If we think it’s hard to be a Christian now, or that the world is so incredibly evil, or that we face real persecutions in this age, then we haven’t a clue of church history.
• If we are so convinced that things are getting so much worse, then we have forgotten about how bad things used to be, and how things have gotten so much better in the last 500years.

During the persecutions of the Roman empire, the tortures and murders of Christians were so horrific that it would be inappropriate to give details on this blog. During the persecutions of the Roman Catholic Church, any speaking out against the Pope, the Mass, praying to saints, Mary, pilgrimages, even simply reading scripture in the English language, was met with almost immediate death by burning at the stake.

One example (of the many) cruelties that stood out to me was a monk named Richard Byfield who was converted to ‘Faith alone’ by reading an English New Testament, and who soon began to agree with the teachings of Martin Luther. When his belief was discovered by the Roman Church,

…he was tormented unmercifully by his accusers. To make him recant, he was often confined in the worst dungeon in the prison, where he would almost suffocate from the putrid odors of human waste and stagnant water that nearly covered the dirt floor…at times his jailers would enter his cell and tie his arms behind his back until his shoulders almost dislocated and leave him in the position for many days without food or toilet. Other times they would take him to a whipping post and scourge him until there was little flesh left on his back. But still he refused to recant his newfound faith in Christ…the archbishop then had him chained to the wall by his neck and beaten severely once a day by his servants. -Foxes Book of Martyrs, ‘Persecutions in England’, Richard Byfield.

Finally, he was burned at the stake. All of this because he would not agree with the doctrine of the Catholic Church.

Often times when burning ‘heretics’, the priests would light the fire so that it burned really slow. They would wait until the fire burned off all of the flesh from the knee down, then they would pressure the Christians to recant their doctrine. Or, they would hang them by the stomach from a tree, and start a slow fire underneath them. Any and everything was done to inflict the utmost of possible pain.

Reading these stories makes me wonder if I or anyone would withstand torture or the threat of death over the gospel. We often think we would never deny Christ, but what about denying that salvation comes by faith alone in Christ? The Catholics weren’t demanding that you denounce faith in Christ, but that you simply agree with their ‘interpretation’ of scripture. Who from this age would stand? Not many I fear.

Thus: Are we really living in the last days? Or are we just ignorant of history? When 1600 years of church history was so incredibly horrific, and the last 400 years have most certainly been peaceful in comparison to back then, on what basis do we conclude that the end is near, or that things are headed downhill?