Revelation, the 13th chapter. We'll begin our reading in, there's a natural break in the chapter, in 11. And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth, and he hath two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men, and deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he hath power to do in the sight of the beast, saying to them that dwell on the earth that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live. And he hath power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads. And that no man might buy or sell, save he that hath the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is six hundred, threescore, and six." You know, two of the greatest riddles of the Bible are the meaning of what we just read, particularly the Mark of the Beast, and of 666. Rev. John Cotton writes in 85 Commentary in the Book of Revelation that this passage is, quote, as obscure as any in the Word. And, quote, if it were not for the providence of God and the invitation of sundry brethren hath put me upon the handling of this book, for my own part I think I should never have chosen this text to have spoken to whilst I had lived. You might remember me quoting that a few weeks ago. It's also said that this expresses my sentiments exactly. But pastors are not to pick and choose what they will and will not preach. We are to preach the Word as Paul instructed Timothy in 2 Timothy 4. Preach the Word, be instant, which means ready, in season, out of season, reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. Now I haven't offered any new ideas in this sermon series, or any of my sermons I hope, nor do I ever intend to. As one venerable Reformed elder, an older man, quite a few years older than I, a Texan, once said to me, If it's new, it ain't true. And that's a pithy comment, but it's a lot of wisdom in that. Jeremiah 6.16 says, Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths. Where is the good way? And walk therein, and ye shall find rest for yourselves. The Lord has blessed the church with a treasury of indispensable books and commentaries written by some of the finest minds in the church going back to the Reformation and even before. And these men are in substantial agreement on the book of Revelation, other areas of course. Now the church, you may not know this, the church settled the understanding of the book of Revelation centuries ago. But sadly this understanding is virtually unknown in our time. The church today is like the Athenians and strangers described in Acts 17, 21, for all the Athenians and strangers which were there spent their time in nothing else but either to tell or to hear some new thing. Indeed, the Holy Spirit speaking through Paul told us this would be the case in the church. In 2 Timothy 4, verse 3, for the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers having itching ears, and they shall turn away their ears from the truth and shall be turned unto fables. Sadly, this is what we see in the church today. We are assaulted from pulpits, Sunday schools, Evangelical books, and movies, and magazines, and TV, and the internet, heaping together teachers, scratching itching ears with fables about what the book of Revelation means, and the identity of Antichrist. It's not always been this way. For centuries, God's elect people knew exactly who Antichrist is. There exists an historical Protestant, which is to say, reformed explanation of the book of Revelation, and this is what I'm attempting to present to you in modern language. to the glory of God. I do want to take a moment to acknowledge and thank my brothers and close friends, Drs. Reg Barrow and Michael Wagner of Stillwaters Revival Books for their contribution to this ministry. They've given photocopies and PDF files of several hundred priceless and otherwise unobtainable books that are going back centuries. So this sermon series wouldn't have been possible without their selfless pioneering work at Stillwaters, and these men at Stillwaters and Restroom destruction, many of the finest Reformed books ever written, which are truly part of the treasury of the Church, which would have been lost to God's people without Reg and Micah. So, to thank them, I hope everyone who listens to these sermons here, and then later on Sermon Audio or on CD, will visit their website swrv.com and support their invaluable ministry. In the sermons so far, in Revelation 13, we found that the characteristics of the second beast described perfectly the spiritual and secular organization that calls itself the Roman Catholic Church. There is unanimity among all the historic Reformed writers that the papacy which controls Roman Catholicism is the beast, or Antichrist. This is demonstrated in what is considered the most doctrinal of the Protestant confessions of faith, the original Westminster Confession of 1646, which this church receives as a subordinate standard, In section 25.6, quote, 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 exalts himself in the church against Christ and all that is called God. Now, if you go on a website of the churches that say they're Reformed, and look up the Westminster Confession of Faith, You only find about half of that there. They stop with, nor can the Pope or Roman any sense behead thereof, period, end quote. They have deleted, is that Antichrist, that man of sin, that son of perdition, etc. Having identified the Antichrist beast, the Papacy, we then proceeded to discover what his mark might be, and noted that it is certainly a spiritual mark of ownership. just as God's people are sealed with the Holy Spirit. And it may also be a reference to a physical mark, referring to the practice in ancient times, if you remember, of slaves, of soldiers, of devotees of certain gods, pagan gods, to have their masters or kings or gods named branded on their hand or their forehead. Even today, when one is confirmed as a member of the Roman Catholic faith, they receive a mark on their forehead. The priest makes the sign of the cross in oil. In some countries, he also marks the hand. And this has also been with ashes on the forehead to all who are in that faith on Ash Wednesday. You see people with the ashes on their forehead. What I didn't have time to say in that Sermon on the Mark was that some Reformed theologians believe specifically that the mark of the beast is the cross. As far as I'm able to determine, the first person to publish that idea was Sir Isaac Newton in his 1733 commentary. And yes, that is the Isaac Newton, the greatest scientist who ever lived. You may know that part of his life, by the way, but you may not know that, in the words of Professor Arthur Anderson, who wrote a short biography of him, quote, Newton devoted a substantial portion of his enormous energy to the study of the Bible and biblical texts and history. He read the Bible daily throughout his life. He wrote over a million words of notes regarding his study of it. Isaac Newton believed that the Bible was literally true in every respect. Throughout his life, he continually tested biblical truth against the physical truths of experimental and theoretical science. He never observed a contradiction. In fact, he viewed his own scientific work as a method by which to reinforce belief in biblical truth. The great George Stanley Faber, in his 1811 commentary on Revelation, agrees with Newton. He notes that, quote, this symbol, the cross, has been abused by the papists to the purposes both of the most infernal cruelties and of the most childish superstition. The cruelties that have been perpetrated under its sanction are notorious. I am strongly inclined to believe that when St. John beheld the secular beast making war upon the saints, he beheld him likewise with astonishment bearing the badge of the cross. For this was the very symbol worn by all those who, at the instigation of the Pope, undertook those diabolical expeditions against pretended heretics. Under the sign of the cross, Throughout France alone, there were slain and reformed a million men. The childish superstition to which the sign of the cross has been prostituted is scarcely less notorious. Dr. Faber goes on to note, by the way, that the sign of the cross is used by Roman priests to consecrate everything from so-called holy water to holy eggs, holy candles, holy salt, and holy bread. and constantly used by the laity in their prayers and for protection against perceived threats, natural or supernatural. So much for the mark of the beast, summing up and adding to the previous sermon. Now let's turn to the number of the beast, verse 18 in Revelation 13. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is six hundred, threescore, and six. This number is 666, not 600. Three score. A score is 20, as you know. So that's 60 and 6. To find out what this means, the verse says, requires understanding, which the Bible calls in other places wisdom. In other words, fools are not to attempt this. But what is wisdom? Is it what the world calls intelligence? If so, Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking and Marilyn Vos Savant, who's in the Guinness Book of World Records for intelligence, must be among the wisest people in recent years. But is this how wisdom is defined? How it is to be found? Man has asked this question since time immemorial. Please turn to Job, chapter 28 in the book of Job. This is what many scholars think is the oldest book in the world, by the way. Job asks in chapter 28 verse 12, but where shall wisdom be found? The oldest book in the world, this question is being asked. Where shall wisdom be found and where is the place of understanding? We learn in 13 that even if he fell over it, unsaved man would not recognize true wisdom. Man knoweth not the price thereof. Man doesn't know its value. And the rest of the verse tells us we're foolish to look for wisdom in what the world considers the most intelligent or considers the wisest people, whether that be Einstein or Hawking or the Pope or the Dalai Lama. By the way, I listened to a speech by the Dalai Lama yesterday. I was on TV. It was absolute gibberish. It was total gibberish. And people are applauding and everything, but you listen carefully. I have no explanation other than it was Jewish. But are we to look to people like that? No. 13b says, Nor is it found in the land of the living. In 1 Corinthians 3, the verse is, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain. Therefore let no man glory in them. In other words, there's only one source of wisdom. It's not from men. The wisdom of this world, which is called foolishness by God in 1 Corinthians 3. But the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. So should you look for wisdom in the laboratory? Will scientists find it through microscopes or telescopes? By studying nature? By looking to outer space? Any probes to Mars that we're doing now? Now, as I pointed out, I think it was last week's sermon, science has an indispensable role to play. It can gather valuable information to improve our lives. The Lord says, wisdom, though, will not be found in the microscope or telescope. or by sending probes to Mars back to Job chapter 28 verse 14 the deep says the ocean for example or the depth and the sea as well the deep sayeth it is not in me and the sea sayeth it is not with me it's not in nature and of course 15 it cannot be purchased cannot be gotten for gold neither shall silver be weighed for the price thereof So where can we obtain the understanding, the wisdom that the Lord tells us in Revelation 13.18 is needed to unravel the mystery of the meaning of the number of beasts. Job 28.20 asks that question, whence then cometh wisdom and where is the place of understanding? 21. It is hidden, seeing it is hid from the eyes of all living and kept close from the fowls of the air. The answer is given to us in the same chapter, just a few verses later, down to verse 28. And that the man, he said, behold, the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom. And to depart from evil is understanding. Psalm 111.10 and Proverbs 9.10 says the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. A good understanding have all they that do his commandments. Proverbs 1.7, the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge. The beginning of wisdom and knowledge is the fear of the Lord. So if you want to have wisdom, Fear the Lord. Now, what is the fear of the Lord? Proverbs 8.13, the fear of the Lord is to hate evil. Pride, to hate pride, to hate arrogancy, and the evil way, and the froward mouth, perverse mouth, do I hate. Putting that all together, if you hate evil, pride, and arrogancy, and the evil way, and the perverse mouth, if you obey His commandments, then you'll be given wisdom and understanding. which will qualify you to look into the deeper mysteries of God, such as to know what it means to count the number of the beast. So the understanding, the wisdom that it takes to figure out the meaning of the number of the beast, 666, is clearly not the wisdom of this world, which God calls, as I said, foolishness. Now this is the problem with many of the claims you've no doubt heard about the meaning of 666 and the identity of Antichrist. What the Lord requires is not human wisdom falsely called, but the wisdom that comes from reading and meditating upon the revelation of God through his written word, the Bible, and living your life in obedience to it. Also, don't be afraid of this riddle of 666, or think it's insoluble, for the Holy Spirit plainly says in verse 18, let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast. If you're steeped in God's word, if you trust in his Son for your salvation, if Proverbs 3, 5, and 6 says, You trust in the Lord with all thine heart, and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths. Then you are invited to understand this mystery. So let's proceed very cautiously, most of all prayerfully, without fear though, having faith in his guidance to unravel this most mysterious of verses. As you well know, there are innumerable theories about what this means. One author said, a Christian author, reformed author, said he counted no less than 80 different theories and he wrote that in the 19th century. Since then there have been a lot more added. What seems to determine what you believe about the beast whose number is 666 is your view of when the book of Revelation was written and what time period you think it covers. Now we talked about this in our series about when we believe it was written, when I believe it was written. Most preterists who believe the book is mostly or even entirely about events in the first century A.D. think that 666 is the Roman Emperor Nero. Some of them think it's Diocletian, but most of them think it's Nero. Now the 19th century heretic German theologian Adolf Harnack popularized this idea among preterists that John meant the Roman Emperor Nero at 666. Harnack, by the way, did not believe in the virgin birth. He did not believe in the deity of Jesus, he didn't believe in Jesus' miracles, he didn't believe in the resurrection. Not someone I would want to claim as a favorite theologian. Harnack translated the words Emperor Nero into Hebrew, and calculated 666 from that. He attempted to bolster it by Revelation 13.3, which says the beast was wounded but healed, and Revelation 17.11, which says the beast was and is not. Harnack said that fits in with a legend about Nero that he hadn't killed himself and would return to rule Rome. As David Brown points out in his 1891 commentary, since Nero did not return and consequently the deadly wound was not healed, do Harnack and the Praetorists mean to tell us that the writer of the Apocalypse was a false prophet? Roman Catholic writers, like Praetorists, also claim 666 refers to Nero. Many probably majority do. That's not surprising since preterism was invented by a Jesuit theologian named Luis de Alcazar in 1615 to counter the claims of the Protestants that the Antichrist is the papacy. Obviously the book of Revelation takes place in the first century AD and the Antichrist can't be the Pope because the papacy wasn't in existence. So they assume 666 means an individual, must be somebody who lived when Revelation was written and therefore Preterists identify 666 or Antichrist with the Roman Emperor Nero. And how they try to neatly fit that idea into scripture. First they have to convert the words Emperor Nero from Latin into Hebrew. Then they calculate using Hebrew letters to represent numbers that Emperor Nero in Hebrew numerality comes to 666. Wow. Pretty impressive. Until you remember that John wrote the book of Revelation in Greek, not in Latin or Hebrew. Preterism is popular only among Roman Catholics and a tiny sliver of Protestants. Sadly, most of those are Christian Reconstructionists, who otherwise have some ideas that are much worth listening to. Most evangelicals have never heard of preterism. They have been taught that the Antichrist is someone who will rise near the end of time, and that we're living at that time, so they're looking for him in the headlines. Most of your evangelical friends, no doubt, are futurists. The modern evangelical church believes in futurism, that the book of Revelation is mostly about the end times. What they'd be shocked to learn is that futurism, and some of you members and regulars who've heard this before, you're not shocked. Futurism, like preterism, is also an invention of the Vatican. It was first proposed by the Jesuit theologian Francisco Rivera in his Commentary on Revelation, published in 1590. And about the same time Cardinal Robert Bellarmine published his book advocating the same futures theory, both books had the Pope's approval. Interesting that the Pope approved of Preterism and Futurism. You would think, well, they're contradictory. But what they have in common is that they say the Pope can't be the Antichrist. The purpose of Futurism was the same as Preterism, to defend the Roman Catholic faith against the claims of the Reformers that the Antichrist is a papacy. If it all takes place in the future, including the appearance of Antichrist, then Antichrist can't be the papacy, can he? Modern evangelicals, Tim LaHaye, Pat Robertson, the late Jerry Falwell, Bill Bright, in fact, almost any evangelical you can think of. Plus, evangelical books and movies, like the Left Behind series, are aiding and abetting this Roman deception. Futurism is pretty much universally taught in evangelical and fundamentalist churches and seminaries, and it's a given in dispensationalist churches and seminaries. And frankly, I'm very thankful for the Futurists. I sit in my library and I study these difficult passages of scripture. It requires a lot of concentration, and I can't do it for extended periods of time without getting fatigued. So I need a break sometimes, and sometimes I'll pick up a futurist book. The theories of futurists are a blessing to all those who need to take a break once in a while from serious study. I believe it's possible the Lord has given us futurists in part to provide us with comic relief. What other conclusion can you draw? Who couldn't resist laughing at theories like 666 means, and you might remember this one, June 6, 2006. That is 6-6-0-6, or some of them then decided to write it as 6-6-6. There was actually a lot of talk on evangelical TV and radio and publications before that date about what could happen on June 6, 2006. Of course, nothing out of the ordinary happened. So we throw that down the memory hole. We don't want to talk about that. Futures have made fools of themselves by trying to predict what this means, 666, the beast, the Antichrist, who will the Antichrist be, and trying to force the headlines into their eschatology. And their record is a sorry one indeed. I'd like you to remember one thing from the sermon, if you don't remember anything else. No Christian And the first 1600 years after Christ ever heard of, much less believed either of these theories, Futurism or Preterism. They believed the book of Revelation is an historical narrative covering events from the first century AD to the end of earthly time. That view has then become known as Historicalism or Historicism, which is unfortunate since it sounds like it's on equal plane with Futurism and Preterism. It should simply be called the biblical view of predictive prophecy. Let the others have names. No one have names. So it bothers me about things like Calvinism and reform. But I guess you need to identify yourself. I'm not making up what I'm about to tell you. Here are some futurist candidates for the 666 beast of revelation that have been advocated through the years, the appearance of which in history will supposedly signal to the end times have arrived and the so-called rapture is imminent. Remember, when you hear these people that have been thought to be Antichrist, remember that those who thought they were Antichrist lived at the same time they lived. Because the Antichrist, so they thought, was to appear at the end of time just before the return of Christ. People always like to think they're living in that time. That's an interesting thought to ponder, by the way. Futurism, especially premillennial dispensationalism, seems to convince people that they are part of the last generation to live on earth, that they're not going to die like everybody else has. They're going to be raptured, that they're going to be alive when Christ returns. Could it be part of the appeal of futurism, especially combined with premillennial dispensationalism, that you'll escape death? Does futurism appeal not to the scriptures, but to the natural man's fear of death? Something to think about. But to survive futurism depends on man's tickling ears for something new. His pride that he, out of all the people who have ever lived, has been chosen to be born in the last generation. For example, some people living in Napoleon's time thought they were living at the end of history and tried to prove that Napoleon was the Antichrist. The problem is there's nothing in the Bible that Antichrist would die an ordinary death before Christ comes back visibly. So when Napoleon died, so did that theory. In fact, all of these theories, when a person dies and doesn't come back to life, well, we'll go on to some other theories. Now, these futurist dispensational theories naming the Antichrist are often accompanied with elaborate charts, occult numerology, proving that the beast is, and here we go, King Louis XIV of France, Muhammad, Oliver Cromwell, Napoleon, King George III, President Franklin D. Roosevelt, Mussolini, Stalin, Hitler, Franco of Spain, his son, the current ruler of Spain, Juan Carlos, President John F. Kennedy. At the 1956 Democratic Convention, Kennedy received 666 votes. I mean, what more proof do you need? When Kennedy was assassinated, that proved to some people that he was the Beast, because Revelation 13.12 says the Beast would receive a deadly wound. The verse also says the wound was healed, so some people actually expect Kennedy's wound to heal. Others that Futurists have thought to be the Antichrist, the Beast whose number is 666, have been Henry Kissinger. Some of you remember these. Ayatollah Khomeini, that was big at one time. President Reagan. His full name is Ronald Wilson Reagan. Six letters in each name. That was all the proof some people needed. Gorbachev. Obviously it's Gorbachev. He carries the mark of the beast in his forehead, doesn't he? That's what they said. I'm not making this up. Sun Myung Moon. Yasser Arafat. Louis Farrakhan. President Clinton. Apparently there's a numerological method that makes his full name, William Jefferson Clinton, come up to 666. There's some method of all these. I'm not going to go into how they calculate every one of them, but somebody's come up with some numerological way of getting 666 out of these names or things that they did. Bill Gates, Prince Charles, Sam Donaldson, Osama Bin Laden, Tom Cruise, Al Gore, In the 2004 presidential election, there were some people who said that John Kerry was the Antichrist. Other people said it was George W. Bush. Most recently, Hillary Clinton. You can look all these up on the internet, by the way. Hillary Clinton, there's a site that talks about she's the Antichrist. Barack Obama, John McCain, have all been seriously touted by some people to be the Antichrist. One website says, quote, Obama's name has 18 letters. Now follow this. 18 divided by 3 is 6. That equals 666. This is the quote, and Obama's zip code in Illinois is 60606. Wake up people, he's the Antichrist. I don't know, I have not found the part in the Bible that reveals the Antichrist's zip code, but now we know. Now I hope that hearing this ridiculous list, and there are a lot more including, by the way, Walt Disney, has demonstrated to you that trying to identify the Antichrist by arbitrarily assigning numbers to the letters of somebody's name until you get 666, or you have 666 votes, or his zip code is 60606, that he must be the Antichrist, or he's so evil, or he's so popular, or he's such an awful person that he must be the Antichrist, is not only inaccurate and absurd, but far worse, it impedes the Gospel. It damages the cause of Christ. It is utterly unbiblical. It makes people who say they are Christians look like crackpots. And the world just loves that. When self-styled Christians come before the world more interested in proclaiming their carefully worked-out proof of who the Antichrist is, than they are to proclaim the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, they become not only crackpots, but enemies of the very gospel they claim to believe. When you tear a verse out of Scripture and you run with it, ignoring the context, ignoring the rest of Scripture that gives guidance to its interpretation, and you put your own ideas on it, spinning it to make the Word say what you want it to say, you've become an enemy of the Gospel. You need to do two things. One is to repent. The other is to shut up. So these four groups, the Preterists, the Futurists, those people who are pushing a political agenda, And the apologists of Rome have so many different interpretations of who the beast Antichrist is that they have buried the answer that the Protestant Church had unanimously agreed upon. It has been almost completely lost to the Church in our time, and we desperately need to rediscover it. Now, in the original Greek in which John wrote the book of Revelation, the number 666 is not written in so many words. Only three Greek letters are put for these three numbers. Pi, Tri, Sigma. Count the number of the beast. Verse 16 is the number of his name. The Greek word translated count means to reckon with pebbles or counters. That's how they counted. Pebbles or counters. It means to compute the number. That's how they computed. The number of the beast means that in some way the beast has a number that represents his name or his characteristics, and by this number he can be identified. We don't use numbers to represent names anymore, but the ancients did. They used letters as numerals. They didn't have Arabic numerals like we do. They used letters, like Roman numerals. We understand what those are letters. V is five, but it's also V. C is also 100, but it's also the letter C. They used the letters. The number of the River Nile in the ancient times is 365. The god Mercury had a number, and he's 1218. That's how his name worked out in Egyptian probably. Jupiter, 737. Apollo's number is 608. So different numbers. So by finding that number in his name, in the beast's name, or in that which properly describes him, we can find out who was meant by the number. and what the number means, and why it's used. It's a riddle that requires wisdom to solve, as the Lord tells us. But why is it a riddle? Why didn't the Lord just plainly tell us what or who He means? We can't be certain, but one thing we can be certain of, it was necessary. Since He did it, it was necessary to obscure it in order to carry out the Lord's plans. There are theories about why, no too dangerous, etc. Maybe. We're not sure, but we know He did it. and it's necessary. The verse says it's a number of a man. Now that might mean one individual man, but it also might mean an order of men, a certain type of man. Reverend Hezekiah Holland, in his 1650 commentary, says it means it is a number for a man to reckon or calculate. That's how he interprets that. James Glasgow, in his 1872 book, says, quote, It does not seem meant to express what we call a proper name, but rather a human name. As when Isaiah was directed to write, in Isaiah 8-1, with a man's pen, the meaning was a pen used by men, not one particular pen used by any single individual. And when the standard of measurement of the New Jerusalem in Revelation 21-17 is said to be a measure of man, it means human stature, not the special height of any tall or short person. This implies we are not limited here to a proper name. Such name may be intended, but in a generalized application. Reformed theologian Arthur Dent, in his 1607 commentary, said that 666 does not signify, quote, any particular man, but about the name of a kingdom, for the beast is a kingdom and a succession of men. Men leading it. David Brown, in his 1891 book, reinforces this by pointing out that Revelation 12.6 1214 and 13135 all say the beast's power is the last 1260 years, so the number of a man cannot mean one individual, that the beast whose number is 666 has to be a succession of men leading a kingdom. Brown says, quote, a power whose duration is so protracted can be no single individual, and therefore must be sought in the successive occupants of the seat of office. So far we've seen the beast as a kingdom of long duration, 1260 years is the height of its power, as we spent quite a bit of time on previous sermons, so it cannot be a human being, one person, one man. It must be a series of men who administer the beast's power on earth. Now, scripture in context gives us guidance to solving this riddle. No name, though it may calculate to 666 in some way, can be the name of the beast unless it agrees with scripture in all details. Since the second beast Chapter 13 exercises all the power of the first beast says that in verse 12 When it comes to these characteristics, they are the same Revelation you want to look at Revelation 13 again, please Let's look at the characteristics that we have to know He as we said verse 12 and 13 chapter 13 exercises all the power of the first beast He looks like a lamb verse 11, that is, the Lamb of God. He looks like the body of Christ. He looks like a church, but he speaks as a dragon, that is, Satan. The dragon is identified as Satan in chapter 12, verse 9. He blasphemes God's name in his tabernacle, that is, God's people on earth. We're looking at verses 5 and 11 in chapter 13. And blasphemes the saints in heaven, even though he appears to the world as a lamb, as a real church. This distinguishes, by the way, him from others who blaspheme, since most of them do not claim to be the true Church of Christ. That's why we say, for example, Muhammad, which is a popular choice for Antichrist, he never claimed to be the Church of Christ. He never claimed to do miracles. Antichrist means one who stands in the place of Christ, pretends to be Christ. He performs miracles in verse 14 of chapter 13. He performs miracles in deceased multitudes. He receives worship from those whose names are not written in the Lamb's Book of Life, in verses 4 and 8. In verse 14, he encourages his people to practice idolatry, to worship the image. In verse 7, he makes war with the saints and overcomes them during the height of his power lasting 1,260 years, which is verses 7, 5, 12, 6, and 12, 14. In verse 15 of Revelation chapter 13, those who refuse his commands he causes to be murdered. He puts his mark, physically and or spiritually, on his worshippers, verse 16. And he must have this mark in order to buy or sell, verse 17. Verses 2 and 4 say that his power, his earthly position and authority all come from Satan himself, the dragon. To sum all this up, the beast is a very powerful empire, a satanic kingdom on earth. There's only one candidate, as you know, that fits both this description in the Bible and the testimony of history. History unveils prophecy, as H. G. Guinness has reminded us, and that is the Roman faith, of course, the papacy. And his number is 600, 3 score, and 6. 666. Now, this can't mean the name has 666 letters. Obviously, there's no name that has 666 letters. Nor is the number of the beast 666, as some would have it. You hear that all the time. And then they go off on all sorts of these fantasy trips. If it was 666, it would be written in the verse in Greek, and his number is sigma, sigma, sigma. But it's not written that way. Number 6 is written three times. It says the number is 666. Somehow 666 expresses the beast's identity in some method of computation that was well understood in John's time, the first century. Interestingly, there is surprising general agreement among the greatest theologians the Lord has given the Church over the centuries as to the solution to the number of the beast. There is not just general agreement, but unanimity among them as to who the beast is. There's some division of what 666 means, but they're all unanimous in saying who the beast is. As I said, there's only one candidate that fits the description of the Bible and the testimony of history, and that is the Roman faith, the papacy. Now I've found the vast majority of the commentators going way back. I'll name some illustrious men that you may know of. E.B. Eliot, who wrote what many consider the greatest commentary on Revelation. Henry Moore, Joseph Mead, Thomas Brightman, Arthur Dent, Alexander MacLeod, Albert Barnes, and many others agree with the second century church father Irenaeus, the student of John. He was a student of the Apostle John, who of course wrote the book of Revelation. Irenaeus suggested that the number of the beast It's a particular name that can be calculated from the clue 666. So my point is, Irenaeus said it's a particular name and he identified that name, and the vast majority of performed commentators since then have agreed with Irenaeus. The minority, this is the minority in numbers of proponents only, certainly not in wisdom or learning or holiness, believe 666 is purely symbolic of the papacy. It's really symbolic and cannot be calculated or added up to result in the name of a particular man or a particular order of men. They don't see 666 as some word that indicates the papacy. They think it's a symbol. Now this minority view, which is held by very few men, would be dismissed were it not believed by such giants of the faith as John Cotton, Franciscus Junius, who wrote the notes in the original Geneva Bible on the book of Revelation. The 1599 Geneva Bible. James Durham, Thomas Goodwin, Nathaniel Stevens. I found one, there are probably others, but of the books that I have, Dr. James Glasgow in 1872 takes a middle position. He says the majority view, quote, obviously answers all the conditions and is one, though not the sole, true solution. He says there's one, but not all, not completely. Irenaeus, too, by the way, said it's probable that there is one, but he says there's a couple other candidates. You may be convinced by it. You may agree with John Cotton and Junius. You may end up agreeing with Dr. Glasgow. My point is to present to you the historic reform position on this. But for now, remember the disagreement among the most gifted men of the Church of the centuries has not been who the Antichrist is. There is unanimous agreement as to the papacy. I read the 1646 Westminster Confession of Faith. 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. And then the rest of the sentence, which they leave out today, was in the original. But is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition, that exalts himself in the Church against Christ and all that is called God? 666 somehow represents the papacy, the leadership of the Roman Catholic faith. On that they are agreed. So what I'd like to cover in this sermon to finish out chapter 13, continuing in our second sermon on verse 18, is to explain the majority view of the church through history, how they got there, and what that conclusion is. In English now, as you know, we use what we call Arabic numerals. which are obviously not the letters of our alphabet. We don't use A to mean 1 or something. But Greek, the language of the Book of Revelation, how it was originally written, didn't have Arabic numerals, didn't have numerals at all. They used the letters of the alphabet to represent numerals. Latin did the same thing. We're more familiar with Latin. We call it Roman numerals. V means 5, X is 10, et cetera. And if English didn't have Arabic numerals that we used, we'd do the same thing. A could equal 1, B could equal 2, C could equal 3, et cetera. Or B could be 5, C could be 10. Whatever the people or the culture had come up with. In other words, if we use the method, let's say, that A was 1, B is 5, C is 10, D is 20, E is 50, F is 100, G is 500. We jump in increments. So I figured out if we did use that method, 666 would be written G-F-E-C-B-A. Obviously, that's nonsense to us, but that's based on that system. And it works in reverse. You can take a word or a name. and figure out what its number is by looking at the letters and saying, OK, these letters have this numerical notation. So the number of that name is whatever it might be. You might try it with your own name. But if you get 666, we're going to keep a close eye on it. Now, a lot of people have tried to figure out the meaning of 666 by assigning letters to the numbers and seeing what names they get. And since there are different ways to do that, as I said, it's arbitrary in English, since we don't have such a system. It's perfectly arbitrary. You can come up with 666 almost anyway, as long as you assign the right numbers to the right letters. If you say that A equals 100, and B equals 101, and C equals 102, you could arrange the letters and get Hitler, H-I-T-L-E-R. And that was a popular interpretation, as you can imagine, during World War II among the allied nations. It shows that we have to be really careful about bringing our own ideas and forcing them onto scripture, these things where we see the headlines or in the news, and then, oh well, this has got to be the answer. So in the ancient world, because letters also stood for numbers, names were numbers also. And that's especially true for pagan gods, as we've mentioned before. It's evident that this is what is in view as the number of the beast, as it says in our text, because it's also called in Revelation 15 to the number of his name. Now, the early readers of John would have perfectly understood what that meant, because they knew, for example, the number of the god Mercury's name is 1218. That's what it comes out to in Greek. I presume Greek. Some of these are Roman gods. Jupiter is 737's number. Apollo's number is 608. So these mythical gods had their characteristic number, and the beast also has his characteristic number, which is 666. There are a lot of words that calculate to 666 in various languages. For example, in Hebrew, the number of the title Caesar Rome, which means emperor of Rome, is 666. If you calculate the number in Hebrew, it does have a numerical notation attached to it, unlike English. So if you use the accepted numerical notation of Hebrew and you calculate, you look at Caesar Rome and you add it up, it comes under 666. Also, Nero Caesar in Hebrew, not in English, but in Hebrew, in notation, comes up to 666. Also in Hebrew, Martin Luther. So if you're thinking about adopting that theory, You can imagine what glee that Roman apologists have when they seized on that to prove that Luther was the Antichrist. In Latin, now that's in Hebrew, in Latin, the number of the name Diocles Augustus, that's Latin translated into English, but in Latin, that's Diocletian by the way, Emperor Diocletian, that's his official name, Diocles Augustus, they all took the Augustus, that comes out to 666. Also, Emperor Julian the Apostate, again, written in Latin and translated into numbers is 666. But to solve this riddle of 666 as the number of the beast, we have to think in Greek, obviously. Greek is the language of the New Testament, the language in which John wrote the book of Revelation. He used Greek letter numerals, if you will, to write out 666 in the original. Chi, Chi, Sigma, 666. Moreover, Christ himself uses Greek to describe himself. In Revelation 1, remember, he said, I am the beginning and the last, Alpha and Omega. The first letter of the Greek alphabet and the last letter of the Greek alphabet. The book of Revelation was written to the Gentiles, the seven churches in Asia Minor. It does as well, of course, but the opening chapters are, remember, the seven churches. Their primary language, Greek. So there's no reason to try to work out the meaning of 666 in any other language except Greek. So we have to know a little Greek. The key to the riddle is to remember, again, in the ancient world of the Greeks and Romans, the letters of the alphabet were numbers. Keep that in mind. Since John wrote the book of Revelation in Greek, we have to learn what the numbers are that correspond to Greek letters. The first letter, alpha, when used in Greek as a number, represents one. The second letter, beta, represents two. Gamma is three, and so on until you get to the tenth letter, iota, which is ten. The tenth letter is iota, which is ten. Beginning then, they go into tens. They're now eleven. Kappa is the next letter after Iota in Greek, and that's 20. It represents 20. Lambda, 30, and so on until you get to rho, which is 100. And then after rho is the next letter is sigma, which represents 200. Then tau, 300, and so on. Chi is 600. Chi is 60, and sigma is 6. 666. The number of beasts is not 666, it's 666. The first question, is there any word whose number is 666 in Greek that fits in with both the context of scripture as it identifies the characteristics of the beast, and also has been demonstrated in human history to describe those characteristics? History unveils prophecies. First, what are the characteristics that are described in the book of Revelation? I'll go through these quickly. I believe we're talking about the second beast here, but it really doesn't matter. The second beast exercises all power of the first beast, so when it comes to the characteristics, they're the same. He looks like a lamb, Revelation 13.11, that is, the Lamb of God. He looks like the body of Christ, but he speaks like a dragon, that is, Satan, who is identified as the dragon in Revelation 12.9. He blasphemes God's name. All these are taken directly out of the scripture. I'm not kind of making things up. He blasphemes God's name in his tabernacle in 13. That is, the tabernacle being God's people on earth, the church, and blasphemes the saints in heaven, the church in heaven, even though he appears to the world as a real church. And that's Revelation 13, 5 and verse 11. He performs miracles and deceives multitudes. That's Revelation 13, verse 14. He receives worship from those whose names are not written in the Lamb's Book of Life, and that's Revelation 13, verses 4 and 8. In verse 14, he encourages his people to practice idolatry. He makes war with the saints and overcomes them, in verse 7 of 13, during the height of his power, which lasts 1,260 years. We get that from Revelation 13, 5, the 12th chapter of verse 6, and verse 14 of the 12th chapter, and we've gone through that in previous sermons. Those who refuse his commands he causes to be murdered, in chapter 13, verse 15. He puts his mark physically and or spiritually on his worshippers, in verse 16 of that chapter. You have to have that mark in order to buy or sell, verse 17. His power, his earthly position and authority all come from Satan himself, Revelation 13, 2 and 4. To sum it all up, the beast is a very powerful, satanic kingdom on earth. All these characteristics. There's only one candidate that fits both the description in the Bible and the testimony of history. And of course, we know what that is, the papacy. And of several words in Greek that calculate to 666, there is one word, one word that the vast majority of historic Reformed theologians have settled on. And not only then, but going back far before the Reformers, possibly even to the times of the Apostles. That word is Latinos. Not Latinos. Latinos. In English, L-A-T-E-I-N-O-S. Normally, sometimes there's a little variation on it. That's the Latin. That's what that means, or the Latin one. Since it's the number of a man, it is the Latin man. That's the word that the majority of Reformed theologians say, even possibly, there's some hints that it goes back to the time of the apostles, the belief of the church. But that's the word for 666, the identifier. Now, Latinos, in Greek, the Greek letters are lambda, alpha, tau, epsilon, iota, nu, omicron, and sigma. Lambda is 30. Its corresponding English letter is L. Alpha is 1, and its English equivalent is the letter A. Tau stands for 300. It's T in English. Epsilon is 5, and its English letter is E. Iota is 10. Its English letter is I. Nu is 50, and its English letter is N. Omicron is 70. It's O in its English letter. And sigma stands for 200, and is translated as the letter S in English. So when written, it is Latinos, L-A-T-E-I-N-O-S. Numerical value in the Greek letter number system adds up to, of course, 666. Now, Latin is, of course, the official language of the Roman Catholic Church. The Latin man is, of course, the head of that church, the pope. Church documents are usually published first in Latin and then translated from Latin into other languages. The association of Latinos with 666 was suggested by Irenaeus, who was taught by Polycarp, as I said, who was taught by the Apostle John, the author of Revelation. In his book Against Heresies, Irenaeus said that it is a very probable solution, Latinos, this being the name of the last kingdom of the foreseen by Daniel. For the Latins are they who at present bear rule. Arthur Dent wrote in the 1607 Commentary on Revelation that identifying Latinos with 666 was, quote, a common received opinion in Uranaeus' time and before. Uranaeus lived from about 130 to 202 AD. That would mean this interpretation was known before 200 AD. He wrote against heresies, I think, in about 170 AD. And that's getting very close to Apostolic times. Irenaeus, a celebrated student of Hippolytus, strongly believed the solution to 666 is Latinos. Other giants of the Church who agree with Irenaeus on this word before the Protestant Reformation include Tertullian, Venerable Bede, Purvey. At the Reformation, those in agreement that the number means Latinos include Martin Luther, Melanchthon, Calvin didn't write on Revelation, he didn't do commentary on Revelation, so we don't know what his opinion is. Among post-Reformation authors in agreement are Isaac Newton, John Brown of Haddington, Faber, Clark, Thomas Newton, the notes in the Dort Dutch Bible, Cunningham, E.B. Eliot, Henry Moore, Joseph Mead, Thomas Brightman, Arthur Dent, Alexander MacLeod, Albert Barnes, and many others. You can see why this took me a couple months to write. And I believe it applies whether you believe 666 is the number of the first beast, which some commentators do, Goodwin and MacLeod, for example, or as I do, it's the second beast for Revelation 13 teaches they are inseparably joined. The second sustained the first. They have the same power and dominion. They have a common master, the dragon, and a common purpose to serve him. The first beast is the earthly tool of the second beast, the earthly church. And there is, in the final analysis, no practical differences between the two beasts. They're both subsumed under the dragon, Satan. Now, the word Latinus applies as well to the Roman temporal power, the earthly power of Rome. The first beast, which became the earthly vehicle of the second beast, the papacy, Italy in ancient times was called Latinu, in English, L-A-T-I-N-U, and the Italians were called Latinae, so that tells us from what country the beast arises. Historically, the beast's prayers were in Latin, his canons, church laws, in Latin, his missal, his prayer book, Latin, and his breviary, Latin, the decrees of his church councils, Latin. His bowls, Latin. He worships in Latin. When I was growing up in the Roman Church, as some of you did, you remember it was Latin, wasn't it? Latin Mass. He blesses in Latin. He curses in Latin. The anathemas are in Latin. All is in Latin, the official language of the Roman Catholic religion. The Council of Trent declared that the Latin Vulgate edition of Scripture was the only authentic version of the Bible. and Roman theologians have preferred it to the Hebrew and Greek text. The logical question is, why is the word Latin, why is the word Roman? I mean the Roman Catholic Church, not the Latin Catholic Church. As an aside, although we're not going to use any other language than Greek, John Fox discovered that even though, in Fox's Book of Martyrs, John Fox Even though John, the Apostle John, wrote in Greek, if the other language of the Bible is used, Hebrew, the number 666 is contained in the word Roman. Roman comes out to 666. That's in Hebrew. Now, but again, I think we have sound reasons to stick with the Greek. Aren't there other words, you might say, that come out to 666 in Greek? Sure. But much to the disappointment of people who ask that question in order to find names, particularly unbelievers have done this to find names that would attack the cause of Christ. People in the Roman faith said, well, obviously we don't want it to say what you're saying, so we've got to find out some other names it applies to, and then we can say, well, you're obviously, maybe it doesn't mean anything. So many possibilities. In the Lord's providence, most of the other words are subsumed under this word Latinos. For example, in Greek, Western Father comes out to 666. The literal wording for Father is, well, of course Roman priests call themselves Father, one of the Pope's titles is Holy Father, so Western Father is 666. Another word in Greek that calculates to 666 is Holy War, which brings of course the Inquisition to mind, the Crusades, other persecutions the papacy has unleashed. Staying with Greek, tradition, the word tradition also calculates as 666, in which P.E. Eliot wrote, no word can be more descriptive of the Roman faith system than tradition. And also, quite amazingly, Eliot observes, head of the church, which is the very name assumed by the second beast, in Greek, is also 666, that of the church. Eliot said, quote, it may be said that the name head of the church would truly belong to Christ, but this would be equally an objection against every name taken by the monster, the beast. In all of them he usurps the names of Christ. Now, some have taken 666 written in Latin, and again we're going to stick with Greek, but I thought it was interesting to see this. written in Latin and come up with some interesting things. One of the Pope's official titles is Christ's Vicar General on Earth, or in Latin, Vicarius Generalis Dei in Terris. And guess what number that comes up to? 666. So does Vicarius Filii Dei, Vicar of the Son of God, another of the Pope's titles. An interesting historical fact is that Well, we all heard of Benedictine monks, named after Benedict, their founder, a fourth century monk. He did more than anybody else to extend that vile system of monasticism over Europe. At the time of the Protestant Reformation, the most popular choice of names, except for one, of the men who would become Pope in all of history was Benedict. The current Pope is Benedict XVI, if that's the name he took. His Latin name is Benedictus. In Greek numerals, Benedictus is 666. E.B. Eliot attempted to find 666 in Greek in the term Angelica, or excuse me, Anglica, not Angelica. Anglica, which is English, means English, Church. Galicia, or French, Church. Agresia, or Greek, Church. and other names, and couldn't find them to make up 666. He couldn't get them to come up to 666. However, in Greek, with the Doric adjective form, the term Italian Church is 666. So these are interesting. They contain truths, because they are consistent with the rest of Scripture, but again, I think we should stick with Greek. If we stray into other languages, we can find some of the Pope's titles there and so forth, but we open the door to Christ's enemies. Again, Luther's name in Hebrew, for example. So the precise solution is the word Latin, Latin man, not Roman, although they're closely tied. Again, on the subject of why isn't it Roman instead of Latin, Eliot says, when the Western Roman Empire had broken up into ten barbaric kingdoms, with Rome as their common religious center and capital, preparatory, according to prophecy, to the development of Antichrist, so it was that just that that critical conjuncture, the Easterns, separating themselves from the nations of the West, this is when the Eastern and Western Church divided, instead of the national name, appellation of Greeks, which more properly belonged to them, somewhat remarkably appropriated to themselves the distinctive appellation of Romans, those of the East. The Eastern Church called themselves Romans, by Eastern Orthodox and all that split. And affixed to those Western kingdoms one and all connected with Rome, and indeed precisely on their account of their connection to Rome, the very appellative of Latins to the Western Church. Here predicted in Enigma, he says in 666. Nor, continuing with Eliot, nor did the latter, that is the Westerns now called the Latins, failed to accept and adopt this title, so that it became, thenceforth, the peculiar, distinctive title of the Roman Empire in its last form, including both body and head, the two beasts and the beast's image. It was the Latin world, the Latin kingdoms, the Latin church, the Latin patriarch, the Latin clergy, the Latin councils. Indeed, the Romanists of the West did, on their part, whatever might yet more add to the appropriateness of the apocalyptic name. Albert Barnes in 1872 writes, in quote, in earlier times the common appellation for the empire was Roman. This continued until the separation of the Eastern and Western empires when the Eastern was called the Greek and the Western the Latin. He's saying the same thing Eliot says. This appellation originally applied to the language only, was adopted by the Western kingdoms, came to be that by which they were best designed. And he goes into that. To use Dr. Moore's words, They Latinize everything. Mass, prayers, hymns, litanies, canons, decretials, bulls are conceived in Latin. Women themselves pray in Latin. The scriptures are read in no other language under the papacy than in Latin. Of course, that was changed by Vatican II, but historically that's always been the case. With what propriety, Albert Barnes says, then might John, under the influence of inspiration, speak in this enigmatical manner? of the new power that was symbolized by the beast as Latin. Okay, objections. Doesn't the text say it's a number of a man? Well, yes, but again, reminding you, the beast is a kingdom that lasts for centuries, longer than a lifetime of a man. It's a succession of men. However, there's another interesting confirmation, twist to this. Latinos or Latinas in the Latin language. Greek Latinos, or Latinus in Latin. Irenaeus says, the father of the Latin race who settled his people in a region of ancient Italy that was to become the cradle of the Roman Empire, which became the cradle of Roman Catholicism, was a man named Latinus in Latin, or Latinos in Greek. The numerical value of Latinus' name is exactly 666. So the beast is a kingdom, it presents itself as a lamb, the church of Christ, but it's a false church. Its base is in Italy. Italy in ancient times, the country, or the region actually, wasn't a country, was called Latinu, and the Italians Latini, as I said. So that tells us from what country the beast comes from. Now there's only one country based in Italy, or one kingdom based in Italy, that's lasted for centuries. and that claims to be the only true Church of Christ, but shows itself to be the opposite, and of course that's the Roman Catholic faith. It is Latinos and contains the number of the beast. What other kingdom can be shown, since John wrote the book of Revelation, which fits the number 666? None, other than the papacy. The solution, as Barnes says, is simple and natural, and meets all the circumstances of the case. Men's restless minds can come up with all sorts of meanings for 666. Don't let us distract us or cause you to think that the riddle can't be solved simply because of the number of claimed solutions. Eliot continues, that which alone completely answers every, and he emphasizes, requirement of the second enigma, the mark of the beast was the first enigma, the number being the second, he says, quote, in which I therefore fully and unhesitatingly believe to be the one intended by the spirit, and Eliot is considered By most commentators, they've written the finest commentary on revelation in relatively modern times, up to today. Which I therefore fully and unhesitatingly believe to be the one intended by the Spirit is Irenaeus' solution, Latinos. And the total failure of every solution of other tendency, I mean of every one of which the object has been to turn away the application from the Popedom to some quite different enemy or supposed enemy of Christ's Church, whether pagan, Protestant, or Mohammedan, has only served to make it the more remarkable and the more convincing. David Steele, in his 1870 book Notes on the Apocalypse, writes, In the thirteenth chapter of Revelation, we have the fullest exhibition of the great anti-Christian confederacy spoken of by the prophets and apostles, including the man of sin, to be revealed in his time. The component parts of that complex moral person called Antichrist are here graphically portrayed. The three most prominent features are the two beasts of the sea and of the earth, which the image of the first, or a tyrannical empire, an apostate church, and the Pope. To suppose that the Antichrist is a power or moral person distinct from these, some willful, infidel, or atheistical king is a mere chimera framed in a learned brain, disordered by anti-Christian politics. So, as I said, many of the finest minds of the Church throughout history have concluded that this is the key to the mystery of 666. A few of equally fine mind have not accepted it, as I said, John Cotton, Thomas Goodwin says that quote number may not mean a literal number and he gives an example the fact that in many languages there's a phrase about a man that he is of no number or account or He a man is numbered among the great, but there is no number that means anything John Cotton I is difficult to comprehend when you read him on this on this, but he says Latinos is but a human invention and does not apply it literally Alexander MacLeod says 666 is the Western Roman Empire over almost all Reformed scholars throughout the history of the Church, whether or not they accept that 666 literally means Latinus, are in agreement that 666 is the number of the Papacy, the Beast. How do they agree? No matter what 666 may mean literally, if there's a literal meaning, if that meaning is Latinos, as most of them have said, it's plainly stated in Scripture that it is the number of the Beast, virtually all the best biblical scholars throughout history have agreed that the beast is the papacy. Some think the first beast is the Roman Empire, the second beast is the Roman Catholic religion, others think the first beast is the Roman Catholic religion, and the second beast is the Pope himself, the papacy. The papacy and the Roman Catholic religion are inseparable, but no matter how one gets there, whether literally through numerical notation, or figuratively, virtually all agree that since 666 is the number of the beast, 666 is the number of the Roman Catholic religion whose head is the Pope. The good news is that 1260 years is over by anybody's accounting. As we can see throughout history, the Roman Catholic faith is in decline. The papacy is not the terror of the world politically that it used to be. We can thank the Lord for that. We have to know these things to be on our guard and always watchful, particularly with our Particularly now, the Reformed faith, Reformed churches, are being greatly influenced by Romanism. You see Reformed pastors wearing collars, which was a Roman invention. You can go to Reformed churches, parts of conservative, otherwise conservative Reformed denominations, and see altars. You can see robes. I know of one particular church or part of a conservative performed denomination, a Presbyterian denomination, they have altar boys. At the beginning of the service, they walk in with their robes on, with a staff, and they walk down the aisle. And it's you look at that and say well, this is an Episcopal or a Catholic Church So it's it's and their theology leads them to that a justification by works theology this federal vision stuff that That's influencing the church, so this is not just an interesting point. You know how oh yeah, this is interesting But it's all past now. It's attacking the church today And we have to be on our guard and be aware of it. I'd like to close with a Another faith-strengthening account of a martyr brother in Christ. This is what we've been doing a lot of the sermons. This is a man you should know about, and the reason I do it, and I do it for a lot of reasons, but one of them is you can enjoy your fellowship all the more when you meet him in heaven. This is the courageous Walter Mill of Scotland. He was one of the first Reformers. This is excerpted from John Howey's book, The Scots Worthies. Walter Mill was born about the year 1476, which by the way was seven years before Martin Luther was born. He was educated, again quoting from Howey's book, he was educated in the Popish religion and made a priest until he was accused by the Archbishop of St. Andrews of having left off saying Mass, which he had done long before that time. On that account, he was condemned in the year 1538, but escaped into Germany where he married a wife and was more perfectly instructed in the true religion. He returned to Scotland about 1556, instructing the people in Christianity. This coming at length to the ears of the Roman hierarchy, in 1558 he was, by order of the bishops, apprehended by two priests and imprisoned in the castle of St. Andrews, where the papists, both by threatening and flattery, labored with him to recant, offering him a place in the Abbey at Dumfrioline all the days of his life, if he would deny what he had already taught. But continuing constant in his opinions, he was brought to a trial before the Archbishop of St. Andrews and several bishops and others. When he came to make his defense, he was so old, feeble, and lame that it was feared none would hear him. But as soon as he began to speak, he surprised them all. His voice made the church to ring, and his quickness and courage amazed his very enemies. At first he kneeled and prayed for some time, after which Sir Andrew Oliphant, a priest, called upon him to arise and answer to the article of charge, saying, You keep my lord of St. Andrews here too long. Nevertheless, he continued sometime in prayer, and when he arose, he said, I ought to obey God rather than man. I serve a mightier lord than your lord is. Now say what you have to say." So Olyphant asks him a series of questions. These are some of the questions and the answers. Now say if there are not seven sacraments, which is what the Roman Church teaches. Walter Mills said, Give me the Lord's supper and baptism, and you take all the rest. What think you of a priest's marriage? I think it is a blessed bond, ordained by God, and approved of by Christ, and free to all sorts of men. But ye abhor it, and in the meanwhile take other men's wives and daughters. Yee thou chastity, and keep it not. Thou deniest the sacrament of the altar to be the real body of Christ in flesh and blood. Walter Mill, the Scriptures are to be understood spiritually, and not carnally, and so your Mass is wrong, for Christ was once offered on the cross for sin, and will never be offered again, for then he put an end to all sacrifice. Thou deny'st the office of a bishop? Walter Mill, I affirm that those you call bishops do no bishop's work, but live after central pleasure, taking no care of Christ's flock, nor regarding his word. You preach privately in houses, and sometimes in the field." Walter Mill, yea, and on the sea also, and sailing in a ship. If you will not recant, I will pronounce sentence against you. Walter Mill, I know I must die once. And therefore, as Christ said to Judas, What thou doest, do quickly. You shall know that I will not recant the truth, for I am corn and not chaff. I will neither be blown away by the wind nor burst with a flail, but will abide both." Then Oliphant, as the mouth of the court, was ordered to pronounce sentence against him, ordaining him to be delivered to the temporal judge and burnt alive as a heretic. But they could not procure anyone as a temporal judge to condemn him. Lermont, the sheriff of the town, refused and went out of town. And the people of the place were so moved at Walter Mill's constancy and offended at the wrong done to him that they refused to supply the ropes to bind him and other materials for his execution, whereby his death was retarded for one day. At last Somerville, a domestic of the archbishop, undertook to act the part of temporal judge, and the ropes of the archbishop's own pavilion were taken to serve the purpose. All things being thus prepared, he was led forth by Somerville with a guard of armed men to his execution. Being come to the place, some cried out to him to recant, to whom he answered, I marvel at your rage, ye hypocrites, who do so cruelly pursue the servants of God. As for me, I am now eighty-two years old, and cannot live long by the course of nature, but a hundred shall rise out of my ashes, who shall scatter you, ye hypocrites, and persecutors of God's people. And such of you now as think yourselves the best shall not die such an honest death as I do now. I trust in God. I shall be the last who shall suffer death in this fashion for this cause in the land. Thus his constancy increased as his end drew nearer. He went up to the stake with a cheerful countenance, saying, I will go into the altar of God. He first bowed his knees and prayed, then arose and, standing upon the coals, said, Dear friend, the cause why I suffer this day is not for any crime laid to my charge. although I acknowledge myself a miserable sinner before God, but only for the defense of the truth of Jesus Christ set forth in the Old and New Testaments. I praise God that He hath called me among the rest of His servants to seal up His truth with my life, as I have received it of Him, so I willingly offer it up for His glory. Therefore, as ye would escape eternal death be no longer seduced with the lies of bishops, abbots, friars, monks, and the rest of that sect of Antichrist, but depend only upon Jesus Christ and His mercy, that so ye may be delivered from condemnation." Then he prayed a little while, and was drawn up, and bound to the stake, and the fire being kindled, he cried, Lord, have mercy on me. Pray, pray, good people, while there is time. And so he cheerfully yielded up his soul into the hands of his God on the 28th of April, 1558. The death of Walter Mill brought about the downfall of Popery in Scotland. The people in general were so much inflamed that, resolving openly to profess the truth, they bound themselves by promises and subscriptions of oaths that before they would be thus abused any longer, they would take arms and resist the papal tyranny, which at last they did. Thus the fire that consumed the body of Walter Mills helped to ignite the most glorious and far-reaching movement of the Holy Spirit in history, the Scottish Reformation. The blood of the martyrs is truly the seed of the Church. Let's pray for Reformation in our day.