Follow
This week we conclude this week our analysis of the Bowls of Revelation 16. Per our analysis thus far, the first five Bowls of Revelation are
The First Bowl: The Stigmata (1224 A.D. – present)
The Second Bowl: The Plague of Scurvy (1453 – late 1700s A.D.)
The Third Bowl: The Dogma of Papal Infallibility (1870 A.D.)
The Fourth Bowl: Scorching by the Sun at Fátima (1917 A.D.)
The Fifth Bowl: The first (and only) formally ex cathedra papal statement in Roman Catholic history (1950 A.D.).
The First Bowl was poured out “upon the earth” (Revelation 16:2), the Second “upon the sea” (Revelation 16:3), the Third “upon the rivers and fountains of waters” (Revelation 16:4) and the Fourth “upon the sun” (Revelation 16:8). The Fifth Bowl is poured out directly “upon the seat of the beast” (Revelation 16:10).
The Sixth Bowl is poured out upon “the great river Euphrates”:
“And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates; and the water thereof was dried up, that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared.” (Revelation 16:12)
In this Bowl, John draws our attention to the fall of Babylon as depicted in Jeremiah 50 – 51. In these chapters, the Lord swears to punish Babylon by drying up her waters, which is to say, the Euphrates River that ran through her:
“A drought is upon her waters; and they shall be dried up: for it is the land of graven images, and they are mad upon their idols.” (Jeremiah 50:38)
“Therefore thus saith the LORD; Behold, I will plead thy cause, and take vengeance for thee; and I will dry up her sea, and make her springs dry.” (Jeremiah 51:36)
The city of Babylon “was built upon the Euphrates, and divided in equal parts along its left and right banks.” This is why the city is described as “thou that dwellest upon many waters” (Jeremiah 51:13), and Rome then is described symbolically as Babylon, “the great whore that sitteth upon many waters” (Revelation 17:1). The judgment upon Babylon during the reign of Belshazzar is what is depicted in Jeremiah 50 – 51, and the drying up of Babylon’s water source is the means by which the way was prepared for the kings of the Medes to take her:
“Make bright the arrows; gather the shields: the LORD hath raised up the spirit of the kings of the Medes: for his device is against Babylon, to destroy it; because it is the vengeance of the LORD, the vengeance of his temple.” (Jeremiah 51:11)
“Prepare against her the nations with the kings of the Medes, the captains thereof, and all the rulers thereof, and all the land of his dominion.” (Jeremiah 51:28)
Notably, when the prophecy was made regarding the destruction of literal Babylon, the threat came “from the North” and was in reference to the Medes (Jeremiah 50:41, 51:48). When the prophecy is made of spiritual Babylon (Rome), the threat comes from the East. This time the Euphrates river is to be dried up “that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared” (Revelation 16:12). In both cases, the threat comes from the same geographic region from which archers (Jeremiah 50:29) threatened the Roman Empire at the time of the First Seal—the former Sasanian Empire—or modern day Iraq and Syria.
What Jeremiah said of Babylon, may truly be said of Rome today, that “it is the land of graven images, and they are mad upon their idols” (Jeremiah 50:38). As we have noted here, the central object of Rome’s worship is the Eucharistic idol, and as we noted here, Eucharistic idol is the Image of the Beast. In our article on the First Bowl, we explained how the First Bowl of Revelation 16 is poured out on men who worship the Image of the Beast. The Roman Catholic religion is wholly devoted to the worship of its graven image, and the drying up of the Euphrates is the precursor to the final judgment of Rome for her idolatry, just as it was for ancient Babylon.
The Euphrates River has been a free-flowing river for thousands of years, but it was not until relatively recently that twelve dams and barrages have been built on the river in order to manage water resources. The first of these the was the Hindiya Barrage, completed in 1913 in order “to raise the water level of the Euphrates” and prevent it from drying up. The remaining eleven dams have been completed since the 1950s, as follows:
Ramadi Barrage (1955)
Tabqa Dam (1973)
Keban Dam (1974)
Fallujah Barrage (1985)
Baath Dam (1986)
Haditha Dam (1987)
Karakaya Dam (1987)
Atatürk Dam (1990)
Tishrin Dam (1999)
Birecik Dam (2000)
Halabiye Dam (planned)
Aside from the Hindiya Barrage, which was intended to keep Euphrates water levels up, the rest were completed after 1950, and some have in various ways contributed to critically low water levels in the Euphrates.
The implications of the proliferation of dams along the Euphrates was made clear when the river was impounded by Turkey in 1990 at the commissioning of the Ataturk Dam. The action immediately led to threats of war, even with 25% of the water continuing into Syria and Iraq (Joost Jongerden, Dams and Politics in Turkey: Utilizing Water, Developing Conflict, Middle East Policy Council, Spring 2010, Volume XVII, Number 1). The tensions in 1990 led to a 1994 agreement between Turkey and Syria “to guarantee a minimum share of the water from the Euphrates to Iraq and Syria.”
Earlier this year, Turkey apparently violated that agreement and cut off the Euphrates entirely:
“Criticism of the Turkish government has been voiced by civil society activists in Northern Syria concerning Turkey’s control of the River Euphrates. In recent weeks, the Turks have stopped the flow of water into Syria from the mighty river, which has its source in Turkey’s Taurus Mountains before flowing into Syria and on into Iraq. …Turkey initially cut the flow of water into Syria at the beginning of May for six days. In June, the government decreased the river flow gradually until it was stopped completely by the middle of the month.” (Abdulrahman al-Masri, Middle East Monitor, June 23, 2014, Turkey’s control of the Euphrates might lead to disaster).
The provocation immediately led to a threat by the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) to invade Europe if Turkey did not reconsider its decision to cut off the Euphrates: “Because if they do not reconsider it now, we will reconsider it for them by liberating İstanbul” (RT.com, August 11, 2014).
That ISIS plans to make good on its intentions is evidenced by increased ISIS activity in Istanbul, and multiple recent attempts by armed terrorists to reach Istanbul. Three ISIS militants who were arrested in March of this year, “were said to be heading for Istanbul, Turkey’s financial capital and most densely populated metropolis.” Additionally, recent intelligence claims “that an ISIS team comprising 20 militants had entered Turkey to carry out suicide attacks in Ankara and Istanbul as well as in Hatay province — have merely increased public concerns.” (ALMonitor, ISIS emerges as threat to Turkey).
It is clear, however, that ISIS has not limited its ambitions to eastern Europe, but has western Europe in mind as well, threatening to kill the pope, and promising that it will not rest until the ISIS banner flies over Rome:
That last threat was accentuated with a photograph on the cover of Dabiq, ISIS’s magazine, showing the ISIS banner flying from the top of the obelisk in St. Peter’s Square. As an ISIS recruiter explained to Italian newspaper, La Repubblica,
“We Muslims believe that one day the whole world will be an Islamic state. Our goal is to make sure that even the Vatican will be Muslim. Maybe I will not be able to see it, but that time will come.” (Italy Steps Up Security Over Alleged ISIS Plot to Kill The Pope—original article here)
Clearly, the dropping water levels of the Euphrates are sufficiently concerning to Syria and Iraq that hostilities have gone beyond mere words. It therefore cannot be welcome news to ISIS that the Euphrates river basin is itself running dry—whether Turkey continues its water embargo or not:
“[I]it is all the more alarming that one of its great river basins, the Tigris-Euphrates—which flows through the so-called fertile crescent that gave birth to agriculture itself—is getting drier. According to a study in Water Resources Research, an American scientific journal, between 2003 and 2009 the region that stretches from eastern Turkey to western Iran lost 144 cubic kilometres of fresh water. … The main reason for the depletion turns out to be that more water is being taken out of the underground aquifer, mainly by farmers. The rate of loss accelerated after drought hit the region in 2007. Between 2007 and 2009, in response to reduced flows of water in the rivers, Iraq’s government dug 1,000 new wells and abstracted four-fifths of all its groundwater reserves. The aquifer is not being replenished at anything like that rate, so this cannot continue for long.” (The Economist, Less fertile crescent:The waters of Babylon are running dry, March 9, 2013)
In this, our final article on the Bowls, we intentionally limit our discussion to
• the proliferation of dams on that river since Munificentissimus Deus, which we identified last week as the Fifth Bowl,
• the current diminishing water level of the Euphrates by natural and artificial means, and the geopolitical response to it, and
• the fact that the Vatican itself is the ultimate target of the eastern powers most affected by those diminishing water levels.
We do not formally identify the Sixth Bowl in this article, but we freely acknowledge that we may well be in the midst of it. However, such things are best identified after the fact, and we intentionally avoid predictions and prognostication here.
We only say with confidence that Rome will one day be destroyed, in accordance with Revelation 16 and John’s heavy reliance on Jeremiah’s description of the destruction of Babylon. But first, there must be a particular proliferation of error and wonders emanating from Rome, because after the Sixth Bowl, John “saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet,” which are “the spirits of devils, working miracles…” (Revelation 16:14-15). We have every confidence that those errors and wonders will be misinterpreted as divine approval of Rome, both by Roman Catholics and their Protestant proselytes, but we encourage the elect to remain firm and stand solely on the Scriptures.
What ought to concern Roman Catholics is not necessarily whether ISIS is satisfied with Turkey’s rationing of Euphrates river water. Rather, what ought to concern Roman Catholics is what is said to lie at the bottom of the Euphrates. Jeremiah was instructed to write “in a book all the evil that should come upon Babylon” (Jeremiah 51:60). Then the Lord told him to bind the book to a stone and cast it into the Euphrates, and let it sink to the bottom:
“And it shall be, when thou hast made an end of reading this book, that thou shalt bind a stone to it, and cast it into the midst of Euphrates: And thou shalt say, Thus shall Babylon sink, and shall not rise from the evil that I will bring upon her: and they shall be weary. Thus far are the words of Jeremiah.” (Jeremiah 51:63-64)
For good reason, John believed that Rome would one day face Babylon’s fate. When the Euphrates goes dry, Jeremiah’s book is once again exposed to the light of day, and Rome, like her symbolic forebear Babylon, will not rise from the evil that the Lord will bring upon her.
“Come out of her My people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.” (Revelation 18:4)
excellent conclusion on that series.
walt,
any conclusion o Tim’s theory would be excellent.
Tim, thank you for the effort you put into this series. Much food for thought.
Tim, first of all I could not qualify how good this whole thing is, because of the exegesis, history, prophecy, and evidence. Staggering. I echo Walt’s words. I thought MacArthur was the best bible teacher of our generation. This stuff is awesome. I do have one question. And if you don’t want to answer it because you will eventually address it I understand. A hint would be good. Eric W and I had a long conversation the other day. And he mentioned and I agree that the idea of a universal visible church has one of the most destructive ideas. We agreed that we don’t believe in a universal visible church with a home office somewhere. We do believe in visible churches, but not a universal visible church. Paul always used the church as a metaphor for the body of Christ. It is constituted of all who have, do, and will profess true religion in many countries of many peoples. It seems, if I haven’t misunderstood you, that you have said God has always marked out His church. It is known for its Apostolicity before the 4th century ( the rise of RC) and by its Protestantism after the Reformation. And I believe that this church has always separated itself from the apostate roman system. IOW the thought that we are separated brethren from the the Home office doesn’t cut it. I would love to hear your thoughts? Because it seems to me if you are positing what you are positing, Rome could never have been a part of the legitimate church. Our confessions say it is antichrist. I believe it has always been antichrist. Sorry for going on to long. Thanks for all the work you put in brother.
Thanks, Kevin,
Of course, the actual church at Rome (i.e., Acts 23:11, Romans 1:1-16:27, 2 Timothy 1:17), was truly part of the Church. When I say “universal” I mean “catholic” in the sense that Christ’s church is one, and superintended and administered by the Holy Spirit. It is “catholic,” but not Roman. You have probably heard R.C. Sproul speak of the catholicity of the Church, and we experience it when we meet a fellow believer from another church of a different denomination. You are absolutely right that “the thought that we are separated brethren from the the Home office doesn’t cut it.” We are not the offspring of Rome—Christ’s church cannot be, because Rome gets its authority from Satan (Revelation 13:2), and Christ’s Church is guided, protected and taught by the Paraclete (John 14:16, 15:26, 16:7).
You wrote,
Yes, Roman Catholicism, Antichrist, was never part of the legitimate church. There are many professing christians who were led astray into it, and that is the great apostasy of which Paul warned (2 Thessalonians 2). As he said in Acts 20:29-20,
Wolves enter in among you, and of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. This is what Paul, John, Peter and Daniel warned about, and this is what happened.
More on this later, but I did want to make this one modification to your phraseology. You wrote,
I would actually say, “The Church is known for its Apostolicity before the Rise of Roman Catholicism, and by its Protestantism since the Rise of Roman Catholicism.” Great men have protested against Rome since it first attempted to take over the Church of Jesus Christ.
More on this as we go forward.
Tim
This is excellent. I am 100 percent with you on this. And yes when I said Rome, I meant Roman Catholicism. This is why I think it is so important for all Protestants to understand this. We must ask Catholics to abandon their idols and RC gospel, come out from that communion, and trust Christ alone for their salvation. For if you believe in your heart and confess with mouth… Thanks Tim.
Tim, one more thing. We are the temple of the Holy Spirit. God dwells in His people thru the Spirit. We incarnate the gospel in that sense. God doesn’t dwell in buildings anymore. Where are you on this. You know allot about this. One more thing. Where do we go from here? Cant wait.
Kevin,
We are the temple of the Holy Spirit, and He resides in the Temple Christ has built:
I avoid “incarnation of the Gospel” as a description of the Christian life because the Gospel is not a person or event. It is a set of facts about a Person and Event, facts which you either believe or disbelieve. The Gospel is not me or my lifestyle. I cannot possibly be an incarnation of a set or propositions. When Jesus commands us to believe in Him (e.g.”ye believe in God, believe also in me” (John 14:1).), He is saying that we need to believe His propositional statements (e.g., “the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life” (John 6:63)), and God’s propositional statements about Him (e.g., “For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me” (John 5:46).) Jesus does not require that we believe He existed (the Pharisees believed that much). We are to believe the Scriptures, namely that He came to seek and save that which was lost (Luke 19:10), and that He “gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity” (Titus 2:14), etc…
In that sense, I would not say we each are the incarnation of the Gospel, or even that the Spirit indwelling us is an incarnation of the Gospel.
You asked, “Where do we go from here?”
I like to intersperse practical implications with eschatological data, so I’ll probably have a few articles on modern Roman errors. Ultimately, I want to return to Daniel, where the treasure lies. There are some assumptions that have been used to interpret Daniel 8, 9 and 11—assumptions that obscure the message—and I’d like to spend some time unraveling those assumptions.
Thanks,
Tim
Awesome stuff Tim!
Tim, interesting is I just looked up incarnate and it said embody or represent. So maybe because we are part of Christ’ s body, we represent Him. Obviously the other defenition given is God embodied in flesh. There is only one who has done that. The church cant be a continuing incarnation or atonement. Thx
The visible Church, which is also catholic or universal under the gospel (not confined to one nation as before under the law), consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true religion, together with their children; and is the Kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ; the house and family of God, out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation (Westminster Confession of Faith, 25:2)
The notes, therefore, of the true kirk of God we believe, confess, and avow to be: first, the true preaching of the Word of God, into the which God has revealed himself to us, as the writings of the prophets and apostles do declare; secondly, the right administration of the sacraments of Christ Jesus, which must be annexed unto the word and promise of God, to seal and confirm the same in our hearts; last, ecclesiastical discipline uprightly ministered, as God’s word prescribes, whereby vice is repressed, and virtue nourished. Wheresoever then these former notes are seen, and of any time continue (be the number [of persons GB] never so few, about two or three) there, without all doubt, is the true kirk of Christ: who, according to his promise is in the midst of them: not that universal [kirk GB] (of which we have before spoken) but particular [kirks GB]; such as were in Corinth, Galatia, Ephesus, and other places in which the ministry was planted by Paul, and were of himself named the kirks of God (The Scottish Confession of Faith, 1560, chapter 18, Presbyterian Heritage Publications, p. 29).
That there is an universal Church, that there has been, from the beginning of the world, and will be even to the end, we all acknowledge. The appearance by which it may be recognized is the question. We place it in the Word of God, or, (if any one would so put it,) since Christ is her head, we maintain that, as a man is recognized by his face, so she is to be beheld in Christ: as it is written, “Where the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together,” (Matth. xxiv. 28.) Again, “There will be one sheepfold, and one Shepherd,” (John x. 16.) But as the pure preaching of the gospel is not always exhibited, neither is the face of Christ always conspicuous, (1 Cor. xi. 19). Thence we infer that the Church is not always discernible by the eyes of men, as the example of many ages testify. For in the time of the prophets, the multitude of the wicked so prevailed, that the true Church was oppressed; so also in the time of Christ, we see that the little flock of God was hidden from men, while the ungodly usurped to themselves the name of Church. But what will those, who have eyes so clear that they boast the Church is always visible to them, make of Elijah, who thought the he alone remained of the Church? (1 Kings xix. 10.) In this, indeed, he was mistaken, but it is a proof that the Church of God may be equally concealed from us, especially since we know, from the prophecy of Paul, that defection was predicted, (2 Thess. ii. 3.) Let us hold, then, that the Church is seen where Christ appears, and where his word is heard; as it is written, “My sheep hear my voice,” (John x. 27;) but that at the instant when the true doctrine was buried, the Church vanished from the eyes of men. This Church, we acknowledge with Paul, to be the pillar and ground of the truth, (1 Tim. iii.,) because she is the guardian of sound doctrine, and by her ministry propagates it to posterity, that it may not perish from the world. For, seeing she is the spouse of Christ, it is meet that she be subject to him. And, as Paul declares, (Eph. v. 24; 2 Cor. xi. 2,3) her chastity consists in not being led away from the simplicity of Christ. She errs not, because she follows the truth of God for her rule; but if she recedes from this truth, she ceases to be a spouse, and becomes an adulteress (Articles agreed upon by The Faculty of Sacred Theology of Paris, in Reference to Matters of Faith at Present Controverted with The Antidote, Calvin’s Selected Works, Vol. 1, Tracts, Part 1, pp. 102103, reprinted in 1983 by Baker Book House).
Tim,
Thank you for almost getting through with you journey thru revelation. It has really been painful to endure.
Kevin,
Are you watching what I am doing on GB? I don’t post daily but when I do, it is always about you and your slur. Patience, Grasshopper. Patience.
You are missing the fun on John Bugay’s Triabologue, ( Aquinas was the problem, the reformation was the answer ).
I have been ruling over there for days. They are going to ban me as I won’t tell them my real name though. It took the buffoons days before they realized my secret pen name is made up from a Catholic rebel who has been dead for about 400 years!
Come on over and join the fun. Just don’t ell them who I really am, okay? Promise? Good boy. See you there.
Tim!
I am roaring in laughter.
Kevin wrote,
“Staggering. I echo Walt’s words. I thought MacArthur was the best bible teacher of our generation. This stuff is awesome. I do have one question. And if you don’t want to answer it because you will eventually address it I understand. Can I shine your boots? Are you going to finish that sandwich? No? Can I have it to take home and worship?”
Do you ever get sick of it? Or do you feed off of it?
Tim, I just read an article by Micael Horton called ” The Vossed World” I think everyone should read this article, especially Catholics. Its very interesting. Blessing K
Which article are you referring to from the Vossed World. Bresson cites more than one from Horton.
Bob, Im sorry I should have given the title ” Jesus in His ascension does not abandon History but redefines all that has preceeded it.” Vossed World Horton.
A reminder that we are currently offering a pre publication sale on the forthcoming new edition of The Westminster Assembly’s Grand Debate. The title is at the book maker and hopefully will be completed in a month. The projected print run is 500-550 copies with a retail price of $52.40. So this prepub offer at $19.95 +s/h is quite the bargain. See the Naphtali Press site for more details and to order. $19.95 plus shipping through Nov. 15 (USA $4.50 media rate; overseas, see link).
http://www.naphtali.com/2014/10/17/prepub-offer-the-westminster-assemblys-grand-debate-19-95-sh/
This work by the Westminster Assembly has not been in print since 1648 and contains the dissenting position papers of the Congregationalist members and the replies of the Presbyterian majority of the assembly. See the link above for more details and commendations by Professors Alan Strange, R. Scott Clark and C. N. Willborn.
The recent critical edition of George Gillespie’s Dispute against the English Popish Ceremonies, and Sermons Preached before the English Houses of Parliament by the Scottish Commissioners to the Westminster Assembly of Divines, 1643–1645 remain in print and on sale. These two works are also available in a special four book ‘book bundle’ sale (USA only). See the NaphtaliPress online store for these and other titles.
This sounds interesting.
Thank you, Walt. This looks like an excellent resource.
Tim
A Dispute Against the English Popish Ceremonies by George Gillespie.
Why should a seventeenth century polemical study of ‘popish ceremonies’ be of any interest to readers in the twenty-first century, unless as a historical curiosity? The style of such works is complex and off-putting and the issues discussed apparently relics of a bygone day. To draw such conclusions would be a serious mistake.
We live in a day when the biblical doctrine of the church is largely ignored, and the resulting ecclesiastical chaos is only too obvious. Though written more than three and a half centuries ago, Gillespie’s book gets right to the heart of the matter. Discussions of the right of the church to ordain ceremonies not prescribed in the Bible, the power of civil rulers to involve themselves in church affairs, the true nature of liberty of conscience—these issues and many more receive thorough examination.
Adding to as well as subtracting from the requirements of Scripture is shown to be unacceptable. The perplexing issue of how to address ‘things indifferent’ is considered at length. Careful thought is given to the place of imitating the example of Christ and the apostles in ecclesiastical matters. All these and more are of pressing contemporary relevance. The style of the book of course offers challenges to modern readers, but Chris Coldwell has done an excellent job of minimising these difficulties in his painstaking editorial work.
Gillespie’s treatise merits the careful attention of all who are seriously interested in hearing what the Word of God has to say in relation to the life and worship of Christ’s church: so gird up your loins and prepare to engage with a master theologian of abiding value. Rev. Prof. W.D.J. McKay, Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland, author of An Ecclesiastical Republic: Church Government in the Writings of George Gillespie.
Early in my ministry I had occasion to discover the riches of Puritan devotional literature. In the beginning of the seventeenth century in England, in Scotland, and in America, there was a real blossoming of Christian learning which, sad to say, was largely neglected by the time I had gotten to seminary. Happily much of this is now at the beginning of the twenty-first century beginning to reappear.
George Gillespie’s work is especially important because it gives us a glimpse of the thought of a Scot who attended the Westminster Assembly. He is notable for his opposition to the religious ceremonies that the Stuart dynasty tried to impose on the Church of Scotland. Gillespie’s opposition to Erastianism was particularly forceful, as was his opposition to the so-called adiaphora, or “doubtful things.” The Stuarts did manage to impose Erastianism on the Church of England, as well as many of the adiaphora, but never on the Church of Scotland.
George Gillespie died young, never having reached his fortieth year, and yet he is recognized as one of the most articulate Puritans of his age. Hughes Oliphant Old, John H. Leith Professor of Reformed Theology and Worship and Dean of the Institute For Reformed Worship of Erskine Theological Seminary, and author of many books including the multivolume The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures in the Worship of the Christian Church.
Whether one’s interest is historical studies or liturgical theology one cannot but be thankful for the work of Chris Coldwell in producing this new critical edition of the Scottish theologian George Gillespie’s English Popish Ceremonies, first published in 1637. The text is a revision of the 1993 edition which was also published by Naphtali Press.
Gillespie’s copious citations of the church fathers, medieval theologians, Reformers, Roman Catholic apologists and contemporary writers have been traced and documented, the bibliography updated, the translation of the Latin proofed and adjusted.
Remarkably, Gillespie wrote this monument of Reformed scholarship when he was but 24 years of age. Its publication was the key to his invitation to serve as a Scottish delegate to the Westminster Assembly, of whom he was its youngest member, not yet 30 years of age. Never did worship ‘according to Scripture’ receive a more comprehensive treatment; never did the regulative principle receive a stronger defense; never were Reformed liturgical theology and apologetics expressed more convincingly than in the hands of the man often called ‘Great Mister Gillespie’ in his own day. Terry Johnson, Senior Pastor, Independent Presbyterian Church, Savannah, Ga., and author/compiler of many books including the Trinity Psalter, Leading in Worship, and The Case for Traditional Protestantism, Reformed Worship.
Gillespie’s famous book is a vitally important work in the history of the Scottish Reformation, but it is much more than simply that. It has abiding and profound value for all who are committed to knowing, applying, and following the Word of God on the proper worship of the church.
With great insight and passion Gillespie pursues the freedom of the church from political interference and from ecclesiastical tyranny as well as the freedom of the individual Christian conscience from the burden of tradition. He rejoiced that the Church of Scotland had gotten “rid of all such rotten relics, riven [torn] rags, and rotten remainders of Popery” and feared that they were now returning by political fiat.
He warned, “there is not a more deceitful and dangerous temptation than in yielding to the beginnings of evil.” This splendid edition makes Gillespie’s demanding work more accessible to the modern reader and encourages careful reading of this vastly rewarding study. W. Robert Godfrey, President and Professor of Church History, Westminster Seminary California, and author of many books and articles, including, An Unexpected Journey: Discovering Reformed Christianity, John Calvin: Pilgrim and Pastor and (with James Montgomery Boice) Pleasing God in Our Worship.
I am finishing a book by Micael Horton called ” Calvin on the Christian Life, Glorifying and enjoying God forever.” I highly recomend it, it is a deep look into his personal piety and practical theology. One qoute I wanted to share which I found awesome. Calvin ” For although faith believes evry word of God, it rests solely on the word of grace and mercy, the promise of God’s fatgerly good will, which is only realized in and thru Christ. For in God faith seeks life, which is not to be found in comandments or the pronouncement of penalties, but in the promise of mercy, and only a free promise.” How good is that everyone!
This theory will go the way of Hal Lindsay’s.
Jim, I must say I have read Catholic Nick’s article on Daniel 2 and one is left wanting. evidence of a novice.. Very unconvincing. There is no Protestant over there yet really capable of putting up pushback, simply because not many immerse themselves in that discipline. But Tim has, and i hope that he will submit his interpretation of Daniel 2 which I believe is spot on. Especially the stone that strike the foot. Catholics must be shown prophecy in order for them to see how Roman catholicism is the synagog of Satan. I think the approach of showing Catholics the idolatry of their false religion, and prophecy showing the Papacy as the beast is the approach that should be taken. Although, Romans 4:5 always is the final refutation. God justifies wicked men, by belief alone in Christ alone, by counting Christ’s righteousness to them, apart from anything they ever do. The “summit” of Christian salvation. If you know what I mean.