The Antichrist's Penchant for Taking Heads

There are three biblical characteristics by which the Antichrist can be identified (other than his proclamation in the Temple that he is god above all that's called god, which removes all doubt). First, he arises in the place of the King of the North (Seleucid Monarch) which was centered in what is today Syria, Turkey, Lebanon, and Iraq. Second, we are told in Daniel that he honors a martial god unknown to his fathers at the time of Daniel and gains his status due to his fealty to him. Third, his name (which could be his birth name, his titular name, or his popularized name) has the gematria value of 666. What can we conclude, if anything from these characteristics?

The 666 is so cryptic, I don't know that there's anything helpful to say about it in this time. Perhaps it suffices just to recognize that what it means won't matter until after the Rapture, when it's used as a mark of submission. Prior to that it's anyone's guess, and after that it will only be of usable consequence to the Jews. So much for gematria.

What more can I say about the King of the North? It really is self-explanatory.

The reference to a martial god, on the other hand, could use some unpacking. It aligns quite well with the god of Islam, and really, no other. Allah is a god of conquest and siege who was unknown in the days of Daniel. Since no other god before or since could really fit the entirety of this description, the Antichrist will be a nominal Muslim.

He will succeed politically through the auspices of Islam. It may be that he initially sees himself as the Mahdi (I think others will), but eventually, he will come to see himself as god. The Islamic world will gravitate toward him, and much of the rest of the world will be bowled over by him and his violent impulse. Resistance will be seen as futile, while spiritual delusion will seal the deal.

With all true Gentile believers removed from the scene through the Rapture, the only people that will withstand the delusion and offer any resistance (particularly to the mark) will be the Jews. For anyone not willing to go along with his rule, his religion, and his economy, their heads will be taken. That that is a a penchant seen readily amongst radicalized Muslims today is no mere coincidence, its seems to me, so the details converge and tell me the Antichrist is a Muslim who will rise to power in the area that's at war this very day.  

God Outside of Time

Omnitemporality is a concept which describes God's relation to time. It assumes that time is properly a dimension of matter, energy and space, and therefore is an intrinsic property of creation. Just as a creator with the quality of aseity cannot be in space, neither can he be in time. Therefore, a creator with the quality of aseity could neither be subject to nor dependent upon time.

An analog for understanding omnitemporality is omnipresence. Both attributes together speak to the Creator's relationship to space/time, and as omnipresence has been fairly well understood and defined, so too can omnitemporality be understood and defined. In relation to space, God's omnipresence is such that every point in space is before God--he is everywhere present at once. In relation to time, God's omnitemporality is such that every point in time is before God at once.

Time began with the beginning of creation, and only has meaning within that creation. Outside of creation, there is no before since time does not exist there, there's just is. To apply a time construct to God; for instance, "God did this and then he did this before he created," is to attempt to apply a descriptor that has no meaning in the situation to which it is being applied. Looking out from creation (and time), one could say, "before creation," meaning outside of creation, not within the framework of time, but that one would err if they meant to extend the timeline before creation.

Such attempts to impose time outside of creation can only lead to confusion and inaccuracy in describing or understanding God or his thoughts and actions apart from creation. Time is contained in the bubble of thought in the mind of God which is creation. It has no impact nor meaning outside that bubble. It will only have existence within that bubble as long as that bubble is maintained.

When that bubble is dissolved and replaced a new regimen is established, it may or may not have a quality like time. Regardless, as for God, He is.

The Keys of Death, Hades and David

The Keys of Death and Hades

He placed His right hand on me, saying, “Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, and the living One; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades."   Revelation 1:17b-18

We use the word key in various ways. It can signify the crucial piece to understanding something or solving a problem. It can merely signify the importance of a thing. It can serve as a figure of affection; for instance, "the key to my heart." It can reference authority, or it can simply be a key, a device that opens a lock.

When it is said that a person holds the key to something the meaning is relatively straight forward. They have the means and therefore the power to unlock what is locked, they exercise control over it. To say that Jesus has the keys to death and Hades is to say that he has the ability to open the door to death and Hades and the power to release those who were locked in behind it. Jesus has authority to release people from death and Hades.

Death is the common fate of all the living. When anything living crosses that threshold, whatever animated its life is lost to its physicality. If that life isn't reinstated quickly it never can be, it's locked up behind death's door. For humans, that impelling, animating something is called a soul, an incorporeal, spiritual essence which carries not only the life force, but the personhood of the human.

Before Christ's ascension, humans souls were locked in Hades (Sheol in Hebrew) upon death. The body turned to dust and the soul was locked in Sheol. There is some thought that Sheol really just meant the grave, but I think Jesus' teaching concerning the rich man and Lazarus completely undermines such thoughts. Jesus envisioned Sheol as a place where dead people were kept self-aware, conscious. Whereas it may have been "restful" for the faithful, Jesus revealed that it was anything but for the unfaithful.

Once in either condition, there was no way out. Death and confinement thereafter in Hades was a one way trip. Jesus, however, overturned the order of all that had gone before and did what no one had done before or since. He entered into death and Hades, and then, of his own accord, he came back. His authority and power over death and Hades was thus neither theoretical nor derivative--it was demonstrative. He went there and came back with captives in tow, that is why he is said to have the keys of death and Hades.

There are not literal keys in Jesus hand, of course, as if he required a tool to open that figurative door. His power is intrinsic to who he is. The keys are merely a figurative way to put the concept into graphical terms. Jesus, the Son of God, has power over life and death, what was irreversible to everyone else is reversible to him. The most impenetrable, intractable wall humanity faces, death and Hades, Jesus had the power to walk right through, and most importantly for us, he has the power to bring others with him.


The Key of David

“And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write: ‘The words of the holy one, the true one, who has the key of David, who opens and no one will shut, who shuts and no one opens.'"   Revelation 3:7

The phrase, "the key of David," elicits similar thoughts as did the phrase, "the keys of death and Hades." In both phrases, the word key relies upon the same basic symbolism which refers to the possession of authority. Whereas the first expression has an inherent Jewishness to it, the second is markedly Greek (Gentile). Regardless, what is in focus is an eschatological, teleological authority--the possessor of the keys has authority to affect and effect the end of things.

David, God's choice to rule over Israel, conquered and then established Jerusalem as the capital of all of Israel shortly after he had consolidated his power over all twelve tribes. Thereafter, the city was often referred to as "the City of God" or the equivalent. Why not? The God-appointed king was there and the only tabernacle of God on earth (the Temple) would be. So, to have the Key of David meant having authority over Jerusalem, and by extension, to have authority over God's kingdom (see Isaiah 22:20-22).

The symbolic connection to the New Jerusalem is obvious. The Messianic heir to David (Jesus) is the one in authority over the New Jerusalem. He has the power to let folk in or to keep them out (see Matthew 16:18-19 for an interesting connection and extension). If entry into eternity with God is something one desires, one will have to come to Jesus and get his approval in order to enter. Thankfully, to be coming to him is all that it takes to get it!

Though there is nothing particularly Jewish about Philadelphia, it was in the message to that church that this Jewish nomenclature was used. In the Kingdom of God, neither Jewishness nor Gentileness matter a whit, despite the fact that there is distinctive historical tracks for Israel's redemption and for that of the Gentiles. I don't think much can be read into that, for the new Jerusalem is of infinitely greater import than the original, and it is to that the symbol actually points.

The Temple A Temporal Clue?

Though the temple is mentioned many times throughout the Apocalypse, the only reference in the entire prophecy which could even remotely be taken to refer to the earthly Temple in Jerusalem is in the beginning of chapter 11. Generally, temple references in the Revelation have everything to do with God's abode in heaven and nothing to do with the earth or Jerusalem. However, since both Temples are mentioned in chapter 11 (see 11:19), I think it is quite clear that the earlier reference is definitely to the earthly Temple in Jerusalem. Does that help date the prophecy in anyway? No, I don't think so.

The language of Temple measuring in chapter 11 is reminiscent of Ezekiel's, which was written many years before. That prophecy was made 14 years after the destruction of the first Temple (586 BCE) during the exile of the Jewish people to Babylon. Though Ezekiel's descriptions are vivid, down to measurement and dimensions, there was no such Temple in Jerusalem when he wrote it--not then, not since (even though a Temple was built by Zerubbabel in Jerusalem and remodeled by Herod the Great). In other words, by biblical precedent, a detailed reference to a Temple in Jerusalem in biblical prophecy is not proof whatsoever that such a Temple existed at the time of its writing.

Since all other references to the Temple in the Revelation clearly refer to the heavenly Temple, there is nothing about any Temple reference which could justifiably be used to infer that the earthly Temple was still standing because of those references. In fact, at the end of the prophecy, perhaps as what could have been an ameliorating salve to those concerned about the earlier loss of the earthly Temple, we are told that no Temple is necessary in the grand scheme of things. I would think that the last treatment of the Temple in the work would be at least as significant in pointing to a post-destruction dating of Revelation, as the middle treatment could be in suggesting a pre-destruction dating.

The Alpha and Omega

Was Jesus a mere man? His self-description, particularly as found throughout the Apocalypse, says absolutely not! Whether describing himself as the Alpha and Omega (basically, the A and Z) or the first and last, or the beginning and the end the effect is the same--Jesus possesses the all-encompassing nature of God. Human history, really all of creation, is encapsulated by him. He was there before there was a here; he has been there throughout time when there was a here; and when time is done and here is no more, he will still be there.

Practically, I think Jesus was also trying to get across the idea that he is the source of life and living, that there is no life but in him, he is the life. The additional descriptor in the letter to the church at Smyrna, "who was dead and came back to life," which was appended to the first and the last  brings this particular into focus. In demonstrating his mastery over life and death his claim to be the all-encompassing God acquired significant validation. Clearly, he was claiming something more than just being a man, even an extremely holy one.

Believers can take heart and be bolstered knowing that this Jesus, to whom we cede fealty, is no mere man, but is demonstrably very God of very God. To know Jesus is to know God. To be his, to be given life by him is blessing beyond the measure of this present world. In Christ is a wealth that crosses the threshold of death and is unaffected by time. In this world we may have tribulation, and poverty, but in Christ we are actually rich beyond the endpoint of measuring whether alpha or omega.

Why Do People Get Sick?

With this post we enter a series on the subject of Divine Healing. Before we get started, here is a list of pertinent scripture verses regarding sickness that you may want to read in conjunction with this article: Isaiah 53:3-5; 1 Corinthians 13:9-10; Romans 8:10-11; Ephesians 1:13-14; John 9:1-3; Luke 10:1-12; Mark 16:15-18; I Corinthians 12; Matthew 9:28-30; Mark 9:23-24; Mark 6:1-6; 1 Corinthians 11:27-32; James 5:14-20; Revelation 22:1-3

Let's first understand where sickness came from. I have no doubt that sickness was not part of the pristine, sinless creation that God called "good." The atonement of Christ included a provision for healing, so it would seem that when things are right with God, sickness is not in the picture. The Apocalypse clears up any doubt on the subject by revealing that in the eternal age to come, trees will provide leaves which keep the body well.

So, sickness must have come into being as a result of the negative impacts that came upon mankind due to not being right with God. That would leave, it seems to me, two possible instigating agents for sickness: God or the Devil. There are scripture passages which attribute illness to God, and passages which attribute illness to the Devil, so maybe sickness is a tag team effort.

I don't believe that to be the case, but let me ask you a clarifying question that may help us discover what is the case: "Did bacteria, amoebas, and worms exist before the Fall?" My answer is yes, they most certainly did. God alone is shown scripturally to have the ability to create life, so the Devil cannot be given the credit for their existence. Yet, most of what we experience as sickness is the direct result of creatures such as these infecting our bodies.

I'm led to wonder, if our immune system worked as well as it must have as originally designed by God, would humans or any life-form ever get sick? If not for the antagonism between creatures and between creatures and their environment resulting from the judgment on sin pronounced by God, would there be anything to get sick from? It seems clear to me that sickness is the effect of the justified curse of death upon Adam and his race.

 

Even though I could see viruses, prions, cancer and genetic defects as being the result of some devilish ingenuity manipulating what God had created, would these types of things have any ill effect (let alone exist) if we were still in the pristine physical condition we had before the Fall? I am forced to conclude that disease actually results from death, rather than death resulting from disease. Our bodies were stricken with a curse which has them decaying toward death and subject to disease from the moment they come into being. 

Everything in creation was stricken by God along with mankind so all creation opposes us and our physical existence-- the ground, plants, animals, and even our bodies themselves. Our bodies do not work up to original design specs; they are infirm; they don't recover like they could; they age, and then they die. Bacteria, viruses, parasites, and genetic anomalies are a problem now because of enmity imposed by the curse, and by our immune systems and the replication processes in our cells not working perfectly as they did in Eden.

Now that is not the Devil's doing, at least not directly by authority, it was God's doing, and God's alone. He had the authority: he spoke the curse. Does the Devil play a role in illness? Peter seemed to think he could. The Evangelists often referred to exorcism in terms of healing. It certainly appears that illness and physical affliction are tools in the Devil's arsenal against the human race in his antagonism toward them.

That is not, however, the same as saying disease is caused by the Devil and his demons. Disease, by general principle, is the result of the Fall, and therefore, in a very real respect, is the God-given, natural lot of life on this fallen planet. And all life is subject to it. That the Devil uses what is available to him to exacerbate our condition and to increase misery should not be surprising to anyone. But to see the Devil behind every bush, or every sniffle, is a mistake, and frankly, gives him far too much credit.

Why do people get sick? Simply, because they live in decaying (dead) bodies. The Devil and his roam about seeking to add misery and to steal days from us while we're in this condition, but they are merely the exploiters, not the authors of it. If the Devil and his minions were deep-sixed today, sickness would still be a possibility tomorrow. Ultimately, to solve the problem and possibility of illness, the curse of death has to be removed from our physical being.

So what's a body to do in the meantime? That, and a few other issues in posts to follow, starting with this one.