Islamic Jihad: Fulfillment of Prophecy?

There has been a good deal of speculation as to whether or not America is mentioned or even indirectly referenced in the Bible, specifically Revelation 12:14 where it is written that the wings of a great eagle are given to a woman to save her from the face of the serpent.

I believe it is somewhat of a stretch to infer America, i.e., the United States, as being the eagle referred to in the verse mentioned above. The Book of Revelation presents its own unique set of challenges for the reader because both figurative and literal language are interspersed throughout the book.

Unlike the sometimes confusing imagery presented in Revelation, there are other verses that appear in other books that really leave very little doubt as to their meaning and one I’m thinking of is John 16:1-2.

These things I have spoken to you so that you may be kept from stumbling. They will make you outcasts from the synagogue, but an hour is coming for everyone who kills you to think that he is offering service to God.

John 16:1-2 NASB

I’m sure some would argue that since Jesus was speaking to His apostles, He was making a prediction concerning them and I would agree with that argument. But if you read through the Gospels you will find that Jesus frequently spoke in prophetic terms. I believe that most honest scholars, pastors, educators and theologians would agree that the Bible wasn’t written specifically for a certain people during a certain time in history but for all people in all ages. Otherwise, why preach it today?

Besides, at the time Jesus spoke those words, the Church had not yet come into existence. The apostles were all Jewish but they would become the core of the newly formed Christian Church being hand-picked by Jesus Himself.

Nevertheless, the words in John 16:2, “…an hour is coming for everyone who kills you to think that he is offering service to God” strikes a chord especially when you consider the worldwide persecution of Christians in many Muslim majority countries.

Let me rephrase what I just said, Christian are being systematically “cleansed” from many Muslim majority countries. As the saying goes, “This isn’t war it’s genocide.”

Some would argue that the Islamic Jihadis are just terrorists with a political or social agenda. If that’s true, then why does ISIS call it’s captured territory a Caliphate which by definition is an area ruled by an Islamic steward? Islam is still a religion, isn’t it? It should be no surprise then that many, if not all, Jihadis adopted “Allahu Akbar” as their battle cry. I’m aware that the term “Jihad” also carries the meaning of “struggle against self” for Muslims but that is not the meaning of the term I’m discussing here.

Islam, Judaism, and Christianity are all monotheistic religions; however, Muslims and Jews both believe that Christianity is a polytheistic religion. (The belief that Christianity is a polytheistic religion is a topic I’ll investigate in a future series.) This view of Christianity as a polytheistic religion is the root of all the animosity both religions have towards Christianity. Of course with the Jews it’s passive aggressive but for the Jihadis it’s an intense hatred that expresses itself in the extremely violent acts carried out all too frequently throughout the world.

While Muslims can accept Jesus as being a prophet, they reject Him as being God. Jews, on the other hand, reject Him as being both a prophet and God. Therefore, He has become a hindrance or an obstacle to both. The problem was and always will be with Jesus as prophesied:

Then He shall become a sanctuary; But to both the houses of Israel, a stone to strike and a rock to stumble over, And a snare and a trap for the inhabitants of Jerusalem.

Isa. 8:14

The bottom line is that there is only one God. Christians and Jews know Him as Jehovah; Muslims know Him as Allah. The problem isn’t with God, it’s with our understanding of who He is and what He has said. So, which religion has it right? I would suggest that one very reliable way to decide is by asking yourself the question, “Whose prophesies have been fulfilled or are now being fulfilled?” I’ve just presented two very obvious ones to consider.

©2013-2024 Gerard Sczepura. All rights reserved.

In the Crosshairs: Guns & Immigration

Guns

There’s a prophecy in the Bible concerning a time when there will finally be a lasting peace between nations and men which up to this point the world has been unable to achieve. The prophecy I’m referring to is in Micah 4:3 which says:

And He will judge between many peoples And render decisions for mighty, distant nations. Then they will hammer their swords into plowshares And their spears into pruning hooks; Nation will not lift up sword against nation, And never again will they train for war.

Who is the “He” that is being referred to in the verse I just quoted? Unfortunately, according the prevailing belief amongst the populations of the world, including the United States, it’s some charismatic politician who claims to know what’s best for us. Much to their dismay, this prophecy is not about any of them, it is about Jesus, the coming Messiah.

Over two hundred years ago a group of men wrote a document that laid the foundation for a great republic which said that the rights and liberties granted to men (and women) were bestowed by God not government. This group of men were the authors of the United States Constitution which was, and still is, the greatest document given to the world, second only to the Scriptures.

Amendment II of the Unites States Constitution guarantees the right of the people to keep and bear arms. However, if you listen to certain politicians like Hillary Rodham Clinton for example, you would think that it is the NRA (National Rifle Association) not the Constitution that guarantees our right to keep and bear arms in the United States. The NRA may be an advocate of gun rights but it isn’t the guarantor of gun rights.

Nevertheless, the Scriptures predicted many false prophets would arise and would deceive many. One of those false prophets was Karl Marx who proposed a different gospel. Marx’s gospel preached the concepts of socialism and materialism. What Marx and his followers believed in was the class struggle between the industrial working class (proletariat) and the wealthy middle class (bourgeoisie).

Marx’s ideology came to be known as communism. The same communism embraced by [the former] Soviet Union, Cuba, China, North Korea, Laos, and Vietnam. While the United States is not listed among those communist countries, it is however, leaning towards socialism, maybe not the radical Marxian variety but a type of socialism nevertheless.

How did this leaning towards socialism come about? Well, it came about as a result of our Western democracy committing fornication with Marxian socialism which produced the bastard child called the ‘New Liberalism.’

So, what does this new liberalism, with its roots in Marxism, have to do with guns? The answer is everything! You need to understand that the goal of the Marxists is the overthrow of all capitalist societies—through revolution if necessary—so that they can bring about their dreams of a socialist utopia. Assuming this is true, then what is the last thing they (communists) want the bourgeoisie to have? Well, you guessed it, they don’t want you to have guns.

Not willing to let any good crisis go to waste, the radicals in the left-wing press were quick to invent new arguments to justify the government taking action, once and for all, to end the private ownership of firearms, i.e., to end the “pervasiveness of gun violence in the United States.” After all, “More Americans have died from guns in the United States since 1968 than on battlefields of all the wars in American history,” according to a recent article by Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times.

Of the 1,516,863 gun-related deaths since 1968, 63% were suicides. I guess you could argue that if guns had been confiscated in 1968 then all those gun-related deaths from suicides could have been prevented. Sounds good, but maybe those in the 63% would have found other ways to take their own lives, possibly by falling on their own swords.

Occasionally I’ll take a ride over to the Webster Flea Market in Sumter County, Florida to pick up some fresh local produce. I also like to wander around to check out all the odd and bizarre stuff they have for sale. It’s not unusual to find swords and knives; guns; and guitars out in the open for sale. As far as I can remember, I never saw a sword or knife leap off the table and stab anyone. Likewise, I never saw a gun load itself and shoot anyone; and I certainly never saw a guitar get up and play “Purple Haze” on its own. All these items are inanimate objects; they only become good or evil depending on how people decide to use them.

Since elements of the lunatic left-wing can’t get their gun confiscation laws passed, they’ve decided to turn their attention to the gun manufacturers. If they can somehow manage to hold the gun manufacturers liable for the deaths resulting from misuse of their products then they can put them out of business. Problem solved. Better yet, instead of going after Smith & Wesson why don’t they go after the Chinese who invented gunpowder and caused the problem in the first place?

It’s interesting that the New York Times columnist chose to compare gun-related deaths to war deaths but ignored some other interesting statistics such as comparisons to the number of auto related deaths or the number of abortions since 1968.

Let’s take a look at some statistics for comparison. Remember, according to the New York Times columnist, there were 120,130 or 9% more gun related deaths than war related deaths since the Revolutionary War (1,516,863 and 1,396,733 respectively).

Auto deaths since 1968:

Average of 45,000/year (roughly) over 48 years equals 2,160,000

Abortions since 1968:

Average of 1.2 million/year (roughly) over 48 years equals 57,600,000

So, now let’s compare the number of gun related deaths to auto related deaths and abortions since 1968:

643,137 or 42% more auto related deaths than gun related deaths

56,083,137 or 3,697% more abortions than gun related deaths

Based on the statistics I’ve just provided, maybe we need more automobile control not gun control. Is the hysteria over gun related deaths justified? For some reason, auto deaths are taken as matter of fact. I’m sure more people would be shocked if they could see just how gruesome auto accident deaths can be. Are auto related deaths less senseless than gun related deaths?

Of course no dyed-in-the-wool, politically correct, liberal, feminist would be incensed over all the abortion deaths that have occurred since 1968—the unborn fetuses, not the mothers. We’ve all seen videos of just how callous and insensitive the physicians and commandants in the abortion camps really are. No problem though, unborn fetuses are just so much tissue.

As we’ve seen, there are way more auto related deaths and abortions than there are gun related deaths or even war related deaths. Still, the Left’s righteous indignation is always directed towards guns and war.

Immigration

President Obama is quick to point out that the United States is not a Christian nation but a nation of laws. Apparently he forgot about our immigration laws, since 2.5 million illegal immigrants have come to the United States on his watch.

Naturally, to be against illegal immigration is to be against all immigration, Not only that, if you speak out against illegal immigration you are labeled a racist and a xenophobe. Furthermore, if you dare to be against settling Syrian refugees in Europe or the United States you are labeled an Islamophobe. Don’t believe it, just ask Donald Trump. By the way, how do they know that Syrian refugees are Muslim? I thought we don’t profile or give religious tests to potential immigrants.

The mainstream press, political pundits, and politicians like to mock the notion of building a wall along the southern border with Mexico. It’s even more ludicrous for them to believe that Mexico will pay for (and probably even build) the wall. The notion of building a wall with Mexico to secure our southern border is frequently likened to the East Germans building the Berlin Wall in 1961. Is this a legitimate comparison? After all, we are building a wall between two different countries, we’re not trying to build a wall through the middle of Washington, D.C.

Blah, Blah, Blah. Do we have borders or don’t we? Does it make any difference if there are 11 million or 34 million illegals in the United States? Let’s assume that 1% of those 11 million could be criminal or terrorists; that would leave us with a small army of 110,000 able to carry out acts like the Kathryn Steinle murder or the Boston Marathon bombing. How many more will be added if President Obama gets his way and lets in another 85,000 from Syria next year?

The loud voices want us to believe that it’s impossible to just round up all 11 million or so illegal immigrants and deport them. That would be un-American and inhumane, after all “that’s not who we are.” I wonder if there would be any problem if the government decided to round up all the Christians in the United States. I bet you wouldn’t hear a peep.

Besides, would it have made any sense for the government to have allowed Japanese, German, or Italian nationals to immigrate to the United States during World War II? Of course not! You would need to have your head examined if you thought so.

But now, President Obama is okay with allowing thousands of immigrants from countries with active Jihadist movements into the United States. During many of his public lectures, Obama never fails to remind us that “We are not at war with Islam. We are at war with people who have perverted Islam.” Well, technically Obama is correct, we are not at war with Islam the religion but we are at war with Islam the political system whether we choose to acknowledge it or not. I’m sure that the average man on the street in America has no idea what the differences between these two concepts are but they had better learn…and soon.

What we need now is a new sheriff in town. As a matter of fact, I think there’s one on the horizon.

©2013-2024 Gerard Sczepura. All rights reserved.

The End Times: Apostasy, Antichrist, and Politics

Apostasy

In a previous post I identified three things concerning Jesus’ return that are indisputable: visible and unmistakable; unexpected; and normalcy, as in the days of Noah and Lot.1 And now we have a fourth thing, apostasy in the Church.

In a letter the apostle Paul wrote to the church at Thessalonica, he reminded them that they shouldn’t be deceived into believing that the day of the Lord had come unless the apostasy has come first. (2 Thess. 2:3 NASB) So what is apostasy and how are we to identify it? Well, according to the online dictionaries: merriam-webster.com and dictionary.com, apostasy is defined as abandonment and departure respectively. To abandon something is to let go of it and you can’t let go of something unless you first had possession of it. Unbelievers, people who were never saved, cannot be apostate since they can’t let go of something they never had; only saved people can become apostate.

A common misconception is that apostates are Christians who have lost their salvation. However, I don’t subscribe to that theory; I believe apostates are Christians who have left their first love, (Rev. 2:3) that is, they have abandoned or compromised many or most of the fundamental doctrines of the faith. They hold on to the “Jesus loves me this I know for the Bible tells me so…”2 refrain from the well-known children’s song, but they put aside other biblical doctrines or strong teachings that conflict with the popular culture that we find ourselves in the 21st century. Everyone is familiar with the current social issues that are in conflict with biblical teaching: women in ministry; divorce; same-sex marriage; and abortion but not everyone would consider belief in evolution; man-made climate change; and economic inequality as qualifications for apostasy, but they are. And yes, a person’s political and religious beliefs are both interrelated and inseparable.

Antichrist

Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour. (1 John 2:18)

Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. (1 John 2:22)

By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God;
and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world. (1 John 4:2-3)

For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist. (2 John 1:7)

Antichrist is anyone who doesn’t believe that Jesus is the Christ. Contrary to Hollywood’s misappropriation of the term, antichrist is not a specific person.3 The character Damien in The Omen is portrayed as the antichrist, but in reality, he is really the beast who the Bible introduces in Revelation chapter 13. Antichrist and beast are sometimes used interchangeably; I guess because “antichrist” has more of a ring to it than “beast.”

Christians can be apostate but they cannot be antichrist. But according to Jesus, it’s possible for false Christians (antichrists) to become assimilated in the Church such that they become almost indistinguishable from the true believers; nevertheless, God is able to differentiate the wheat from the tares. (Matt. 13:29-30)

Politics

The theology of liberation or liberation theology is one such example of blending politics and religion. In liberation theology, Scripture is reinterpreted with a bias towards the poor. This brand of theology advocates its followers to engage in the struggle to liberate the poor from their male-dominated, rich, white capitalist oppressors.4 You know the old saying, “If it looks like Marxism and smells like Marxism, it’s Marxism.” So, the question becomes, can a person still be a believing Christian while embracing socialism and Marxism? Well, according to William Montgomery Brown, the answer would unequivocally be “No!”

The Rt. Rev. William Montgomery Brown, D.D. was a bishop in the Episcopal Church who published a very interesting and enlightening booklet in 1920 called Communism and Christianism Analyzed and Contrasted from the Marxian and Darwinian Points of View. In his booklet Rev. Brown describes the relationship between supernatural Christianity and science (Darwinism); Christianity and socialism; and Christianity and communism (Marxism). I present here some excerpts from Rev. Brown’s booklet. I have numbered them for later reference:

[1] No man can be consistently both a Socialist and a Christian.5

[2] It is, therefore, a profound truth that Socialism is the natural enemy of religion.6

[3] The Creation idea is unsupported by evidence, and is in conflict with every scientific law.7

[4] Religion, which is the ideal half, and politics, which is the practical half, of the same reality, human socialism, are like all else in the universe, constantly changing, and necessarily so, because life and progress are dependent upon change.8

[5] Yes, strange, even blasphemous, as the representation may seem, it is nevertheless true, the machine is the only name given under heaven whereby the world can be saved.9

[6] Darwinism and Marxism constitute one gospel, the only true, comprehensive and sufficient gospel which the world has ever had or can have, and there is no hope for the future of mankind except in it.10

[7] Christianity has held the world back from civilization instead of advancing it towards civilization.11

While Rev. Brown was never a real Christian, he definitely was a bonafide, dyed-in-the-wool communist. Note how in excerpt [5] and [6] he professes to worship the creation (the machine) instead of the creator (God) whereby the machine becomes the savior of the world not Jesus. In fact, Rev. Brown never actually believed that Jesus was a real person let alone the son of God. He vigorously denounced the supernatural or spiritual aspect of Christianity. (It’s Interesting to note that Rev. William Montgomery Brown remained a professing Christian even after he was convicted of heresy in 1925—the only person to be convicted since the Middle Ages.)12

In excerpt [4] he declares that religion and politics are really two sides of the same coin. That is to say religion being the theoretical side and politics being the practical side. In his mind, he attributes capitalism (the scourge of the working class) as being created and sustained by Christianity. Capitalism being the devil and Darwinism/Socialism/Marxism being the triune god that saves the world.

In excerpt [1] and [2] the battle lines are drawn; Christianity is declared the enemy of socialism. After reading Rev. Brown’s booklet, it should come as no surprise to the reader why the political Left is so hostile to Christianity. The Left believes that Christianity is hindering their entire agenda, namely wealth redistribution, income equality, social justice, and whatever else that goes along with it.

Since all public school curriculum has been coordinated along left-wing ideology, there’s no tolerance for creationism or intelligent design as inferred from excerpt [3].

Has Christianity really held the world back from civilization as stated in excerpt [7]? Certainly Rev. Brown thinks so, but so does President Obama based on his “pattern” of anti-Christian remarks such as his infamous comment made during an Easter breakfast held at the White House:

On Easter I do reflect on the fact that, as a Christian, I am supposed to love. And I have to say that sometimes when I listen to less-than-loving expressions by Christians, I get concerned.13

Or how about this comment:

In the United States, Eid also reminds us of the many achievements and contributions of Muslim Americans to building the very fabric of our nation and strengthening the core of our democracy.14

And this one:

Unless we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. And in our home country, slavery, and Jim Crow, all too often was justified in the name of Christ.15

So, based on his own words, Obama really is acknowledging that ISIS is carrying out terrible deeds in the name of religion; otherwise, why would he draw a comparison with the Crusades and the Inquisition which everyone identifies with the Roman Catholic Church. Furthermore, like Obama said, the ISIS threat is not unique; history records wars against militant Islam for almost four hundred years during the 7th, 8th, 15th, and 16th centuries.16 Even though the “Mohammedan Arabs with fire and scimitar had crushed and subjugated the entire Persian Empire and over half of Christendom,”17 it was the Crusaders who were the oppressors.

Nevertheless, the one thing President Obama can’t do is label ISIS for what it really is, an organization that wants to convert the world to its brand of Islam through terror and intimidation.

So then according to the Left’s rewriting of history, it really was the Christians who held back civilization. And “Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus.”

©2013-2024 Gerard Sczepura. All rights reserved.


  1. Gerard Sczepura, “The End Times: Arguments Against a Pre-Trib Rapture,” Theological Ruminations (blog), May 4, 2015, http://gerardsczepura.com/?p=627

  2. Anna B. Warner, Jesus Loves Me, 1860, http://library.timelesstruths.org/music/Jesus_Loves_Me/

  3. Gerard Sczepura, “The End Times: Hollywood’s Take,” Theological Ruminations (blog), March 7, 2015, http://gerardsczepura.com/?p=599

  4. “Christian Revolution in Latin America: The Changing Face of Liberation Theology,” Ron Rhodes, accessed June 21, 2015, http://home.earthlink.net/~ronrhodes/Liberation.html

  5. Brown 1855-1937, William Montgomery (2010-02-16). Communism and Christianism Analyzed and Contrasted from the Marxian and Darwinian Points of View (p. 10). Public Domain Books. Kindle Edition. 

  6. Ibid., 12. 

  7. Ibid., 17. 

  8. Ibid., 44-45. 

  9. Ibid., 53. 

  10. Ibid., 54. 

  11. Ibid., 60-61. 

  12. “Bishop Brown,” Galion Historical Society, accessed June 22, 2015, http://www.galionhistory.com/about-bishop-brown/

  13. “Obama’s anti-Christian ‘pattern’ disconcerting to some,” Chris Woodward, OneNewsNow.com, April 8, 2015, http://onenewsnow.com/politics-govt/2015/04/08/obamas-anti-christian-pattern-disconcerting-to-some

  14. “What Obama just said about Muslims and their influence on America is beyond disturbing,” Joshua Riddle, Young Conservatives, July 28, 2014, http://www.youngcons.com/what-obama-just-said-about-muslims-and-america-is-beyond-disturbing/

  15. “People are freaking out after Obama compared ISIS to the Crusades,” Colin Campbell, Business Insider, February 6, 2015, http://www.businessinsider.com/people-are-freaking-out-after-obama-compared-isis-to-the-crusades-2015-2#ixzz3divxEH1V

  16. “On the Spanish Inquisition and the Crusades,” Dr. Miguel Faria, Hacienda Publishing, September 12, 2011, http://www.haciendapub.com/randomnotes/spanish-inquisition-and-crusades

  17. Ibid.