A group of migrants from Venezuela planned their next steps at the Downtown El Paso Greyhound station after they were released to the streets as part of an effort by the Border Patrol to control the population at its El Paso Central Processing Center. The men gave their consent to be photographed. (Cindy Ramirez/El Paso Matters)
It may come as something of a surprise to many people to hear that Rome is at the very heart of America’s ongoing immigration crises. While Joe Biden’s policies are the proximate cause of this immigration disaster, what is not appreciated is that the Biden Administration’s immigration practice is really the practice of Rome’s destructive immigration doctrine, which is itself based on the false theology and philosophy of the Roman Church-State.
But despite Rome’s involvement, both theoretical and practical, in America’s immigration mess, almost no scrutiny is brought to bear on Rome’s role. In his book American Democracy & The Vatican: Population Growth & National Security, Stephen D. Mumford went into some detail on how Rome successfully suppressed criticism of itself. Wrote Mumford, “Every city editor in the United States knows of the unofficial Catholic censorship of American news, but almost all publishers avoid discussion of the phenomenon out of fear of reprisals. The Church frequently succeeds in intimidating the most powerful newspapers by using organized protest and boycott, even though in many cases the facts suppressed have great social significance.” (Mumford, 1984)
Pope Francis consecrates the world and, in particular, Ukraine and Russia to a demon posing as Mary, the mother of Jesus during a Lenten penance service in St. Peter’s Basilica at the Vatican March 25, 2022. (CNS photo/Paul Haring)
There was a time in my Christian walk that eschatology, that is, the study of the doctrine of end times, didn’t seem all that important. There were a lot of competing ideas about end times in the popular Christian press, but none of the popular ones that I saw made much of an impact on me. None of them struck me as compelling.
But the longer I’ve been a Christian, the more I’ve come to appreciate the importance of having a sound understanding of eschatology.
Take the doctrine of the identity of Antichrist. Although many Presbyterians and members of other Reformed churches may be surprised to hear this, the original version of the Westminster Confession of Faith had a very well-developed statement on Antichrist, leaving no one in doubt as to the identity of this person.
It was the Pope of Rome.
Westminster Confession of Faith 25.6 originally read,
There is no other Head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ: nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the Church against Christ, and all that is called God.
Martin Luther as Hercules Germanicus by Hans Holbein, 1523. “In the picture, Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, William of Ockham, Duns Scotus and Nicholas of Lyra already lay bludgeoned to death at his feet and the German inquisitor, Jacob van Hoogstraaten was about to receive his fatal stroke. Suspended from a ring in Luther’s nose was the figure of Pope Leo X,” The Reformation Room.
There is no other Head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ: nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the Church against Christ, and all that is called God.
Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 25.6
“I have no idea who Antichrist is.” I don’t remember anything else about the sermon. I don’t even recall the name of the man who preached it. But I do remember it was on a Sunday morning in December 2006 that I heard those words, “I have no idea who Antichrist is,” come from the pulpit of Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church.
I case you’re wondering, no, it wasn’t D. James Kennedy who made that comment. It was a guest preacher, whose name escapes me.
It’s just as well I don’t recall the man’s name who uttered those words. For it seems to me that what he said that Sunday could well be said by most of the professing reformed church, both in 2006 and in 2021. No one, it seems, has any idea who Antichrist is.
It’s a mystery wrapped in an enigma, to borrow a turn of phrase from Winston Churchill. Or at least that’s how it seems to most Christians today.
Detail from The Tower of Babel by Peter Brugel, 1563.
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Genesis 1:1
“The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, and obeyed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man, or Church; but wholly upon God (who is truth itself) the author thereof: and therefore it is to be received, because it is the Word of God.” Thus reads Chapter 1, Section 4 of The Westminster Confession of Faith.
Last week it was mentioned that it would be both foolish and impious of me to attempt to prove that the 66 books of the Bible are the infallible and inerrant Word of God. The foolishness of this project, as you may recall, was found in the axiomatic position the Bible plays in the Christian system of thought.
An axiom is a first principle, an unproven and unprovable first principle. The reason an axiom is unproven and unprovable lies in the very definition of the term “axiom” itself. If one were to prove a first principle, then it would no longer be a first principle. Whatever argument used to prove the axiom would take the original axiom’s place as the new first principle.
Some Christians may be concerned by the assertion that we do not prove the axiom of Christianity – The Bible Alone is the Word of God – supposing that somehow this puts Christianity on a shaky footing. But this concern can be assuaged by remembering that all systems of thought – and this includes all secular systems of thought of the sort the world delights to throw at Christians – have their axioms. In this case, the Christian with his axiom is no worse off than the secular scientist or philosopher with his axioms. The Christian begins his thinking in one place, the 66 books of the Bible. On the other hand, the scientist begins his thinking in another place, perhaps on the axiom of the general reliability of the senses.
In addition to it being foolish to attempt to prove that the Bible is the infallible and inerrant Word of God, it was also mentioned that it would be impious to do so. “Impious” is not a term we use often, so perhaps a definition is in order. Merriam Webster defies it as irreverent or profane. The notion that the fallible words of sinful man are better testimony of the truth than God’s Word itself is the very definition of impiety.
The Westminster Confession citation above refers to several passages from Scripture to supports its claims.
1 Peter 1:19, 21 And so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts; for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.
2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.
1 John 5:9 If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater.
It was Augustine who famously wrote, “For understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore do not seek to understand in order to believe, but believe that you may understand” (Tractate 29 on John 7:14-18). In this statement, Augustine shows himself a Scripturalist. He attempts not to prove the Bible is the Word of God, but accepts it as true – that is, he accepts the Bible as his axiom – and his understanding of God and his works follows from this.
With all this said, let us turn to the subject at hand, which is Genesis as history.
Lux Lucet 