Prejudice in the Church

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

LONG and FINAL POST:

On the matter of making statements such as follows:

>" Are the Jews Antichrist?  It is John that has the opinion that they are..."

>Notice, THEY (antichrist) went out from us THEY(antichrist) were not of 
>us, if THEY (antichrist)had been of us.....etc.  you get the picture.  
>Antichrist in Johns writing is They not he. 

(refering in context to Jews)

> You cannot have the Jew be Gods chosen and have the Bible 
>say they are antichrist all in one breath.  They are antichrist or 
> they are Gods chosen but certainly not both.

Perhaps one might say that they hav identified the source of
persecution of the age of tribulation. Yes, the word "antichrist" is
never used personally, refering to an individual, but refers to a
spirit which denies Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.

Classical eschatology has identified "antichrist" with the
personalities called "the beast" (first so called in Rev 13:1 and on),
with the "man of sin, son of perdition" (2 Thes 2:3), "prince that
shall come" (Dan 9:26), the "little horn",  and "stout horn" (Dan
7:8,20), "king of fierce countenance".

There is a good reason for identifying the term with THIS CHARACTER
(yes, MOST believe that the evil of AntiChrist WILL at some time
immediately prior to the coming of the Lord be personified in one
individual who will attempt to lead all nations as one single power,
and seek to be worshipped as God). The reason is that  each of them is
shown in a specific scenario, playing the role of what Christ ought
(prince king, messiah, god) as a substiitute. 

>From the original language, the term antichrist is simply composed of 
"anti" and "christ". We know what "christ" means. It is the greek for
"messiah" or "anointed one". It refers to a single unique
representation of God. "Christ" appears in plural only in the synoptic
Matthew 24 and Mark 13, with the prefix "pseudes" not "anti",
refering to lying "chraomai" (the root of "christ"). that the enemy of
our souls wants us deceived is no surprise. However we ought to know
that throughout the age following the incarnation and up until the
second coming there would be "lying christs (plural) and lying
prophets" to deceive. No doubt ALL of the "pseudochristos" were let by
the spirit of antichrist. And THAT includes all who today practice
healing and attribute the power to a devotion to Mary, thereby calling
people into communion with the antichrist spirit in Christian
surroundings.

However, the character depicted with the titles typically given the
title ANTICHRIST, is *singular*. He  is not just one of many such
pseudochristos. he ius a master manipulator, and a would be deceiver
of the whole world. The sciptures support this, so if these comments
are to be disgrarded by the explaination "this opinion", contend
against the scipture, not me. I am not listing them, as it is obvious,
and could lengthen this post by at least double in so doing. Good
students will look these things up, and will see this.

In these 4 references, and hence, personified in the  the embodiment
of ANTICHRIST the prefix is "anti". to most it simply means "against",
and this is reasonable. Luke 9:50 qualifies one "against us" (a useful
judgement of course, only if we are with Christ). to be against Christ
is to be against His purposes and against His Kingdom.

Its other and more typical usages is "instead of". The title Vicar is
appropriate because the Vicar of Christ is admittedly and clearly a
title which means substitute for or instead of Christ. The title is
literally the expression ANTICHRIST. ( I am not saying "the pope is
the antichrist" - merely that the term is in us, applied to
individuals today, and so sardonic it is: the term is quite favorable
to some ears when expressed in that way, but then the same one is also
a deceiver.)

"Anti" also appears in the word DEPUTY (anthupatos).
It is in the world "exchange" of Matthew 16:22 (antallagma) depicting
an equivalence or replacement.

Finally, one interesting useage is in "Antipas" which means "Like the
father" :-)

I have provided this support to show that there is a significant
reason to understand that the term antichrist can reasonable be
personified in prophecy. We already know that it typically IS
personified.

The world at large sees the term ANTICHRIST as a perjorative and
ultimate indictment of evil. Properly so, for the Bible requires it.
Insofar as Jesus instructs " Forbid  him  not : for he that is  not
against us is for us" we are left to determine HOW EXACTLY Jews are
distiguished from others who specifically ARE against us, and make
their efforts very focused and clear. Are the JEWS any more against
us, or any less for us, as a race, or as a religion, than other
relgions or people?

It is HIGH UNLIKELY that any apostolic preacher reading has EVER been
instructed  that they were in error and forbid to preach in Jesus'
name, lately as were Peter and the rest in Acts 5:28? No, probably
they were resisted directly by Baptists and Catholics. Within the last
month we have fellowshipped with a Church of God Pentocostal preacher
who was baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. His church was taken as
soon as he was known to be teaching that Jesus was the One True God.
His livelhood was removed and He as called before the Overseer, who
was not a jew at all, but rather a Gentile. And the general overseer
informed the man that he had SINNED by being baptized in Jesus' name.
What he was saying was this: "Jesus is NOT *GOD* manifest in the
flesh, and God has not come in the flesh, but rather He is the Son
only." 

This notion, whether communicated by Christian, Muslim or Gentile, is
ANTICHRIST, and emanates from the mouths of many a religious person.
In fact, SOME of the GREAT men who today believe and preach a Bible
message, ONCE were ANTICHRIST, by the simple definition. Yes, they are
ELECT. A pundit would probably go on to say they WERE elect prior to
coming into truth. Elect - AntiChrist. Strange.

I have heard with my own ears a Church of Christ preacher say "Jesus
is not God as such". He was not a Jew, and appeared to hold a notion
similar to that which we have recently heard regarding Jews, that is,
that they are ANTICHRIST.

If rejection of the notion of God manifesting in flesh in Jesus Christ
is sufficient to label one ANTICHRIST, then ALL of those who refuse or
fail at one time or another to receive our witness are ANTICHRIST. If
so, then we minister to ANTICHRIST - we preach to ANTICHRIST - we pray
for ANTICHRIST. 

Is it possible to identify institutions that are specifically
ANTICHRIST ? Perhaps, but if so, on the basis of a cursory and
uninspired reading of 1 John 2;4 and 2 John 1,  the CATHOLICS and
others teaching the religious philsophy of Christiandom are NOT
ANTICHRIST, for they concur and recite the same scripture saying that
"Jesus is come in the flesh". 

If JEWS are specically ANTICHRIST, then we come from a Church that was
largely racially ANTICHRIST from its inception. After dealing with the
problem of identifying whether we are refering to RACIAL Jews,
Orthodox Religious Jews, Refomed Jews, Practicing Jews,

We are ostensibly members of a church that had its origins in
ANTICHRIST. For 10 YEARS exclusively ANTICHRIST flesh was filled with
the Holy Ghost.



It is exteemly ironic that one man says to me, upon my condemning the
association of the word ANTICHRIST with Jews and or Judaism, "why dont
you just go ahead and says its Nazi or something" :-) Why ironic?
well, for the slow readers consider that basically NAZIS did indeed
profess these very same ideas. In fact so did all those who persecuted
both JEWS and other monotheists, such as true Christians.

You may not like to hear it, and you may call it foolishness, but if
there is ANY significance to the Jewish race, it is NOT that they are
"Christ killers", which perjorative has been ressurected at this
timely juncture when the world (even the USA) is beginning to turn
hard against Israel, but that they are the source of all the
revelation which you have today, and were cut off as a people for our
sakes, and because of the SAME UNBELIEF that caused EVERY LIVING
BREATHING BLOOD WASHED TRUTH LOVING child of God to, at one time,
stand in definance of God as a hell bound sinner.

Can was also say Muslims are AntiChrist ? How about Hindus are
AntiChrist? Buddists are AntiChrist?

Before we look at the "election" let me note: THE ELECT were ELECTED
from the hell-bound and lost  sinners of the whole earth. ANTICHRIST
is a spirit.. over and over again.. it is a SPIRIT and not a RACE

If a JEW is ANTICHRIST, then members of your own family are
ANTICHRIST. 

Concerning the term ELECT..

It is a mistake to imagine that whenever the term ELECT is used in
scipture refering a people, it must refer to the same people. 

The term has 27 usages in the old and new testaments with the original
Hebrew (bachyir) and Greek (ekoge or eklektos) - from which comes the
modern ecclectic, and elect. The meaning is CHOICE or CHOSEN.

In Isaiah 42;1 , it refers to a single individual, relating to God's
plan to use One particular Man to bring salvation.

In Isa 45:3 God calls Israel (national Israel, specifically JACOB to
know that it is ELECT and to regard God as its maker (Father). He
further extends this revelation. He is their SAVIOR. Jesus confirms
this with the words " I am not sent but unto the lost sheep  of  the
house of  Israel". Here we are simply saying that, no matter what
other thoughts one has, it is not improper to refer to Israel
(national) as ELECT.  One might argue that the "CHOISE was altered",
but that argument is classical Catholicism and will not stand in the
light of Romans 9-11. In any case, a choice was made and Israel
benefitted there, at least once.

In Isaiah 65:22 the Lord is depicting a time when the curse of sin
will not effect his "elect". A number of remarkable things (such as
Lion laying down with Lamb) occur here in a setting that is typically
associated with the Millenial Kingdom. At this time it is said "my
ELECT will enjoy the works of their hands. We have a few basic choices
here. 1) Envision a church that is working on the earth planting
gardens, and living longer than 100 years - perhaps as long as a tree,
2) Spiritualize and abstract the whole matter out of comprehension
(though it was written to and read in israel for 750 years before
Christ), or 3)Consider the ELECTION of ISRAEL to be genuine and
fulfillable by God despite the hinderances of unbelief.

The covenant with the house of David is expressed in numberous places:
2 Chron 21 being one - but the promise to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob,
and then David was also intended for a remnant of the Hoise of Jacob.
Again this is explicit through the OT, but the book of Romans makes
this case well, and I must conclude now to keep this reasonably brief:

Lets just look at this now:

9:1  I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing
me witness in the Holy Ghost,  2  That I have great heaviness and
continual sorrow in my heart.  3  For I could wish that myself were
accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the
flesh:  

Notice: According to the flesh... now look at their PRESENT MERIT AS
PAUL WRITES WELL AFTER THE DAY OF PENTECOST.

4  Who are Israelites; to whom [pertaineth] the adoption, and the
glory, and the covenants, and the giving  of  the law, and the service
[ of  God], and the promises;  5  Whose [are] the fathers, and  of
whom as concerning the flesh Christ [came], who is over all, God
blessed for ever. Amen. 

NOW, in chapter 9 vs 6 - 10 vs 17 this theme is developed:  The
promise was not inherited by ALL of appearant Israel because the
promise ALONE combined with FAITH (being of the birthline alone was
not sufficient  ) was the means of deliver of the promise, and Israel
as a whole had NOT sought it by faith. Further, that he had called
BOTH Jews and Gentiles, and ordained that ALL (concluded under sin by
the law) must seek and receive salvation by faith. Now, what NEEDS to
be understood here, is that while LEGAL aquisition of the blessing was
not permitted unto Jews, blessing by FAITH was not denied them. 

This is obvious, but some stumble in seeing that the PROMISE to the
remnant of Irsael to preserve and bestow the same salvation on them
was NOT eradicated some number of years after Pentecost (perhaps, as
some say, with Paul's decision to turn to the Gentiles). 

Listen now to Pauls comments concenring his kindsmen:

27  Esaias also crieth concerning  Israel , Though the number  of  the
children  of   Israel  be as the sand  of  the sea, a remnant shall be
saved:  28  For he will finish the work, and cut [it] short in
righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.
29  And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord  of  Sabaoth had left
us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha.

Now, you will not find a Citizen of Gomorrah, or an Amorite, or
Cannanite on the earth today - but you will find Jews. How strange
that these same people are alive and well identified over 4,000 after
God first placed his hand on Abraham, despite the many efforts of
Satan to slur and discredit such people - many even claim that they
are not Jews at all, and using various degrees of the horrid
"replacement theology" call them ursurpers and even ANTICHRIST.

10:1  Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for  Israel  is,
that they might be saved.  2  For I bear them record that they have a
zeal  of  God, but not according to knowledge.  3  For they being
ignorant  of  God's righteousness, and going about to establish their
own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the
righteousness  of  God. 

Now, one man said "your argument is not with me it is with scripture!"
and went on to say that people try perversely to claim that Jews are
blind or ingnorant in their ANTICHRIST nature. However verse 3 of
chapter 10 tells us exactly that. Are there more such verses ?

Yes, but first .. why is this being allowed ?

19  But I say, Did not  Israel  know? First Moses saith, I will
provoke you to jealousy by [them that are] no people, [and] by a
foolish nation I will anger you. 

Provoked to jealosy ? When ? In Hell ? Long after there any hope? is
God teasing? Paul puts it this way speaking in the PRESENT TENSE
(Paraphrasing - and interpretting Psalm 65): 
21  But to  Israel  he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my
hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.

Here Judgement is promised, but will he eradicate it completely ?
Isai 65:8  Thus saith the LORD, As the new wine is found in the
cluster, and [one] saith, Destroy it not; for a blessing [is] in it:
so will I do for my servants' sakes, that I may not destroy them all. 
Isai 65:9  And I will bring forth a seed out of Jacob, and out of
Judah an inheritor of my mountains: and mine elect shall inherit it,
and my servants shall dwell there. "

Why does God do this ?
34  My   covenant  will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone
out of  my  lips.  35  Once have I sworn by  my  holiness that I will
not lie unto David.  36  His seed shall endure for ever, and his
throne as the sun before me.  37  It shall be established for ever as
the moon, and [as] a faithful witness in heaven.

God Holy, and God is faithful and true. Israel as a nation never had
the opportunity the gentile nations have with the power of the gospel.
Does Psal 89 refer to the messiah? yes, and to the national seed of
David, which being regathered today.

In chapter 11:
11:1  I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I
also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, [of] the tribe of
Benjamin.  2  God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew.
Well then...He didnt.

5  Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according
to the election of grace. 

According to WHAT ??? The ELECTION OF GRACE.. Is that the present
church? Is Paul saying "yeah, we are them" ?

Now watch:
7  What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but
the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded

The ELECTION has obtained it, but the REST were blinded. If the word
ELECTION meant a specific group of people NATIONALY or otherwise, then
everyone would be in trouble here, but it doesnt.. it means simply
those who have obtained salvation, but what about the REST ?? Now
BLINDED.. 

11  I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid:
but [rather] through their fall salvation [is come] unto the Gentiles,
for to provoke them to jealousy.

To provoke WHO to jealosy ? Remember 10:19.

12  Now if the fall of them [be] the riches of the world, and the
diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their
fulness? 

Accoring to some, there can be no FULLNESS because they are
ANTICHRIST.

17  And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild
olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the
root and fatness of the olive tree;  

BE CAREFUL TO COMPREHEND WHAT FOLLOWS:

18  Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest
not the root, but the root thee. 

23  And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be
graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again

IF THEY ABIDE NOT STILL IN UNBELIEF ?? ANTICHRIST - the man of SIN -
the persecutor of the Church (like Saul) ?

5  For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this
mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness
in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be
come in. 26  And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There
shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness
from Jacob:

NOTICE THE TIME LIMIT AND DONT BE IGNORANT!

Was the CHURCH Blinded ?? Ever ? But it speaks here of the FULLNESS
(completeness) or CONCLUSION (END) of the TIME of the GENTILES, and
then no more blindness... It wasnt the church binded .. then who will
be saved  ? ALL the CHURCH ? No - it does not say this UNLESS the
church was blinded.

27  For this [is] my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their
sins.

Now watch who you call the ANTICHRIST on the basis of disliking the
the idea that a JEWISH PEOPLE could be refered to as the ELECT.

Get this:

28  As concerning the gospel, [they are] enemies for your sakes: but
as touching the election, [they are] beloved for the fathers' sakes.
29  For the gifts and calling of God [are] without repentance.

ISRAEL COULD NOT cause GOD to reject them utterly. He would NOT do it!

31  Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy
they also may obtain mercy. 

HOW, through YOUR MERCY, thats how!

Now, "Pray for  the peace of Jerusalem: they shall prosper that love
thee." and pray meaning THE actual CITY in the actual land where God
has ordained a people of ELECTION should dwell by some wisdom that is
well described here:

32  For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have
mercy upon all.  33  O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and
knowledge of God! how unsearchable [are] his judgments, and his ways
past finding out!  34  For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who
hath been his counsellor?

Yes, some dont like it, but God does it God's way!

I said I thought that the concepts being expressed were themselves
antichrist in origin. I do believe that and have felt that way for a
long long time. each and every time one mounts a verbal, economic,
political, religious or military attack on JEWS (even through wrong
inteprettation of scripture) there is an evil spirit at work.

The Christian radicalism today that is spreading like wildfire in the
USA has several interesting characteristics:

1a.  Some is Trinitarian/Ammillenial
  b.  Some is Monotheistic/PostTribulation
	(the raptiure doctrine is typically depised in the latter)

Focusing on the latter group - these are the YAHWEH movmet which is
gorwing in leaps and bounds and disdains the idea of trinity and
denies the Absolute Deity of Jesus Christ. There are groups that are
Noahide on the rapid increase, again anti trinitarian (monotheists)..
Their common complaint ? The JEWS are usurpers and ANTICHRIST.  This
is the fast growing religion of the Christian Identity movement and
ith its roots last century in the British Israelism which allowed the 
civilized world to look on with apathy for quite a while as the
Gernans dealt with the "Jew problem" which the whole world complained
about but would not publically acknowledge.


The Amillenial Trinitarian groups are a little different, but not much
- Here is the seat of the Kingdom Age doctrines which were so well
defended against a few years ago, but today are stronger than ever and
firmly seated in many churches which enjoy much spiritual power of
some kind. Their concept of Jews? They re obsolete: with Rome, they
believe the church has replaced the Jews. They see Jewish prospeperity
as something that the church is entitled to.  Consider the works of
the middle ages and see if we really want to latch into these ideas
which against and again saw Jews banished from whole countries, killed
by the hundreds of thousands, and driven across the world. 
Yes, they said "let the blood be on our hands" but "  woe  to that man
by whom the offence cometh!"

And my friends, it is NOT my words that are the offenses regarded in
this passage. We are weak hearted and self-possessed. Look at these
people and understand that THEIR plight MIGHT have been ours
eternally.

The JEWS can INDEED be refered to as "the ELECT" especially BEFORE the
advent of Jesus Christ and calvary, and AFTER the times of the
gentiles are fulfilled.

*** 

Some will say that they are offended by my posts and manners. let me
say this: Racial judice is not only ungodly and inexcuable spirit to
incorporate into our lives, much less our doctrine - it is the worlds
# 1 problem today in terms of giving people something to poke at. if
one is perceived as being a BIGOT, they will NEVER communicate
anything of value to anyone of any significance. The world is being
educated that RACE or RELIGION is NOT an element in judging a persons
quality. The Apostolic people need to consider what the WORLD is
teaching them, for it is ABSOLUTELY TRUE.

It is a sad day when the church is so disobedient and hard hearted
that God requires the world to teach it, and it is still a struggle.
However, God is FOR us, and we, being CLAY (and not GENIUSES that can
tell God who to save and why and how and why he cant do it with some)
are going to be prepared to be used to comunicate the gospel.

If IRON must sharpen IRON, then OK. Men of God have gone through
MUCHh, and will go through more, for the sake of the gospel, ridding
themselves of tenets and carelessness that does not suit the nature of
the battle which is needed to take sinners (no not ANTICHRISTS) from
the world into the place of mercy and opportunity.

I make this my last post on higher-fire, thanking all the good people
who are involved for their love of God and earnest desire to seek
truth as instruments of God.  When a person is reaches a certain
point, it is time to go on an dbreak new ground, lest he be resented
and thought a dictator for simply having and expressing convictions,
and acting in conscience when he sees evil.

I apologize to those who feel that I was too hard on this or other
subjects. I do not aplogize if I got in the way of your favorite
misreading of scripture. I pray God will send someone else to do the
same thing. Why not ? Thats what I would want  God to do for me. We
are moving into the UNITY of the FAITH, not disgarding inessentials
and offering up all such scripture as OPINON. 


-mw bassett
milford, ct
http://eli.wariat.org/~mbasset