I had considered taking a break from
the Preterism vs. Futurism series I have been doing so that I could
focus on a few other topics, afterward continuing the current series.
That was until the end of band rehearsal tonight. On the pulpit was a
magazine called, Endtime. One
particular article caught my attention, and I am going to address it.
The
executive editor, Irvin Baxter, is a Pentecostal minister. He is also
the founder and president of Endtime Ministries. The ministry's
purpose is to preach the gospel of the kingdom to every person on
Earth, for the end is now.
Or so
they think.
Like
so many others who focus on eschatology, Baxter's intentions are
quite pure. I've little doubt of that. I find that he is
knowledgeable of what it is he believes, though I find his beliefs
unscriptural in so many ways. In the May/June 2013 issue of Endtime,
Baxter has written an article titled, “Is Pope Francis the False
Prophet?” This caught my eye because I have been awaiting a
thorough analysis concerning St. Malachy's “prophecy” (if only
Christians realized this “prophecy” is no more than a 16th
century forgery...).
The
Background Details
The
first heading reads: “St. Malachy's Prophecy of the Last Pope.”
Baxter begins with some details concerning Malachy:
“St.
Malachy was the Archbishop of Armagh, Ireland. He claimed he
experienced a vision while visiting Rome in 1139 AD. He said he saw
every pope that would exist from the time of his vision until the
last pope. The last pope would be the 112th
from the time of his vision. Malachy also stated that God would judge
His people and the city of Rome would be destroyed during the reign
of the last pope. In Malachy's vision, a clue was given as the the
identity of each pope, including the 112th
one. The clue for the 112th
pope was 'Peter the Roman' (Baxter, Irvin, Endtime,
10, 2013).
The
manuscript containing Malachy's prophecy was supposedly stored in the
Vatican Secret Archives, and forgotten, until the end of the 16th
century. By the time John Paul II was nearing his death, observations
concerning this line of 112 popes began to become more common. The
111th
pope was identified as “Gloria Olivae,” or “the glory of the
olive.” While the 111th
pope, Joseph Ratzinger, had no ties to an olive, his papal name did.
Ratzinger occupied the papacy under the name Benedict XVI. Baxter
writes:
“The
original Benedict became the founder of the Benedictine order, one of
the most prominent orders in the Roman Catholic Church. And the
symbol of the Benedictine order? The olive! Now Malachy's prophecy
seemed more credible than ever!”
Of
course, Ratzinger wouldn't purposefully
choose that name to fulfill Malachy's “prophecy,” would he? Nah.
That's absurd...right?
In
February of 2013, Benedict XVI resigned. Uh-oh. If Ratzinger was the
111th
pope, that means the next pope would be the one, two, three...112th
pope! The following month would see the naming of the “last pope,”
Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Argentina. Bergoglio decided to occupy the
papacy under the name Francis. Pope Francis is unique, for he was
Argentina's superior of the Society of Jesus, otherwise known as the
Jesuits. Why is this interesting? Jesuits do not seek ecclesiastical
offices.
Elements
of Malachy's Prophecy
Baxter,
on page 12, lists five elements of Malachy's prophecy: 1) There is
going to be a final pope; 2) During his reign, the Roman Catholic
Church will be judged; 3) During his papacy, Rome, the city of seven
hills, will be destroyed; 4) The last pope will be the 112th
pope from 1139 AD; 5) The clue to his identity is “Peter the
Roman.”
Baxter
writes, “The prophecies of the Bible perfectly agree with the first
three points of the Malachy prophecy” (p.12). Actually, that's not
true at all. According to Baxter's Dispensational paradigm the Bible
may agree with the first three points, but as for what's actually
written in the Bible it shares no such relationship. Before
addressing this, I'd like to take a look at Baxter's analysis a
little more.
Baxter
took the time to list how the Bible's prophecies differ from
Malachy's: 1); The Bible states that a final pope is coming. However,
it does not say he will be the 112th
pope from 1139 AD; 2) The scriptures say nothing about “Peter the
Roman”; 3) The Bible says the last pope will be in alliance with
the world's last political leader – the Antichrist; 4) The
scriptures call the last pope the False Prophet; 5) The biblical
prophecies say the final pope will perform many signs and lying
wonders, even pulling down fire from heaven. These miracles will be
used to deceive the people of the world; 6) The final pope will
influence the world to give their allegiance to the Antichrist and
his one-world government; 7) The False Prophet will endorse a program
of global socialism, causing all people to receive a mark or number
that will be required for buying and selling. This “Mark of the
Beast” will apparently be a global scheme for wealth redistribution
(social justice); 8) The Second Coming of Jesus will end the reign of
the Antichrist and the False Prophet. At that time they will both be
cast into the lake of fire (Revelation 19:20).
Amazingly,
after listing eight biblical “facts,” Baxter provides one
citation of scripture for proof. And why is this? Because everything
else he lists is based on interpretation, not
what the text is actually saying.
Malachy
and Baxter Analyzed
In
our list of five elements contained in Malachy's prophecy, the first
thing Baxter noted was that there would be a final pope. Baxter
claims scripture agrees with this. According to Futurist theology,
there will be an end to the current world someday. Thus, a final pope
someday is simply natural ratiocination per Baxter's paradigm.
Scripture, however, does not even address an “end of the world,”
rather an “end of the age.” This “end” was already present in
the first century (Acts 2:16-21; Hebrews 1:1-2). For more on why the
“last days” are already past, read my article on how to identify
the last days
(http://fulfilledfocus.blogspot.com/2013/03/preterism-vs-futurism-last-days.html
).
The
second aspect of Malachy's prophecy is the judgment of the Roman
Catholic Church during this final pope's time in office. If
Dispensational theology is correct, it would make sense this would
take place (he would have
to be the final
pope if the Catholic church is going to be destroyed during his time
as pope). Baxter comes to this conclusion because he interprets
Mystery Babylon as being the Roman Catholic Church
(http://www.endtime.com/urgent-questions/mystery-babylon-who-is-it/
). He, of course, cannot provide scriptural proof for this (the Bible
doesn't name Mystery Babylon as Rome, but it does apply all
characteristics to Jerusalem),
because none exists. Scripture does,
however, support Jerusalem as the harlot city. I've also written on
this
(http://fulfilledfocus.blogspot.com/2013/04/preterism-vs-futurism-zionists-are.html
).
The
third aspect of the Malachy forgery—er, prophecy—is that Rome
would be destroyed at the time of the 112th
pope. Baxter likely agrees with this because of his identification of
Mystery Babylon. It would make sense. But this isn't scriptural,
either. The fourth beast was the Roman empire of antiquity, not the
Roman Catholic Church, or a “revived Roman empire.” That is all
nonsense. The last days came to a close in A.D. 70. Rome was
certainly prophetically relevant at one time! No doubt about it. But
that relevance ceased at the end of the last days, when Jerusalem was
laid to waste by Titus and his army.
The
fourth aspect is that the final pope would be the 112th
pope from A.D. 1139. Baxter does agree that this is not scriptural,
though he does believe in a final pope in general.
The
fifth and final aspect is the name “Peter the Roman.” I have
found one attempt at making this work with Pope Francis, and it was a
pathetic effort. In Baxter's lists of differences, he does note that
this is also not supported by scripture.
Conclusion
Baxter
has made it quite clear that he believes the pope to be the False
Prophet. But even if God had given Malachy prophetic insight into the
future of the Catholic church (which I don't believe happened), it
certainly wasn't a vision pertaining to the end times. I'll be
writing articles dedicated to the False Prophet, Antichrist, and
others in the future, but for now consider the following:
The
last days were taking place in the first century and were already
present during Christ's ministry (Hebrews 1:1-2). Peter affirms this
when the Spirit is poured out on Pentecost (Acts 2:1-4,16-21). He
quotes Joel's prophecy and tells us this was for the last days, and
was fulfilled at that very moment (cf. Joel 2:28-32). Jesus said that
some standing there, at that moment, would be alive to see the
Messiah return in glory (Matthew 16:27-28). Likewise, he told his
disciples in the Olivet Discourse that this same generation—his
generation—would not pass away before the Son of man returned
(Matthew 24:34). I think it is pretty obvious that they were to
expect Christ's parousia before that generation passed away, don't
you?
The
book of Revelation runs parallel with the Olivet Discourse (Matthew
24, Mark 13, Luke 21). Mystery Babylon (who Baxter identifies as
Rome/RCC) is also seemingly where the False Prophet resides, who he
claims is the pope. However, if the judgment of harlot Babylon is the
time of the avenging of the saints (Revelation 18:24; 19:2), and
Jesus said his own generation would experience this when Jerusalem is
destroyed (Luke 21:22-24), by what logic can one conclude that the
identification of the False Prophet/Mystery Babylon is a
person/entity outside of these restrictions!? It is impossible
to make such a claim!
Case
in point, Baxter fails to apply any form of consistent hermeneutic to
his theology. He is guilty of the same newspaper exegesis of every
other Dispensationalist. I say again, I believe he is sincere in what
he believes. I also appreciate his ministry's concern for spreading
the gospel (says a lot more about him than most Full Preterists). But
Baxter only hurts his efforts with these ridiculous and silly
interpretations. He isn't preaching the true
gospel, which is a fulfilled
gospel!
Perhaps
Baxter will change his views someday. I'd like to see someone like
him teach the one eschatological view that isn't make believe.
Blessings,
Jason Watt
No comments:
Post a Comment