A quick study on False Teachers. 2 Peter 2:1-3

I have had an up close and personal relationship with a false teacher for some time now. As usual, the Holy Spirit prompts me to see that far too many of us have to deal with people like this. Why would a false teacher be such a problem, especially since most of the influence asserted on us is minimal and annoying at best. For myself, I feel like I have wasted that portion of my day, and always have to do some quick research into the Word to debunk the garbage I, and the others had to listen to. Others ask outlandish questions, questions they would not ask if they spent anytime pursuing the Word of God. Sadly, the false teachers waste our time with garbage instead of the Word.

Having recently started a commentary on 2Peter I would have come to this discussion eventually, but for several days now, I feel compelled to do a quick study on false teachers. It would seem we are surrounded by them.

Also, I am not sure I understand what quick is either. If you do a phrase search in the NASB (my version of choice) there is only one reference to false teachers, and this is it:

2 Peter 2:1-3 But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves. 2) Many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of the truth will be maligned; 3) and in their greed, they will exploit you with false words; their judgment from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep.

Peter has projected this into the future, but if you know your Bible, then you know that false teachers came on the scene quickly. You may not see it, but there is a list presented here that describes the false teacher:

• “secretly introduce destructive heresies,”

Having a familiarity with someone who plays the role of false teacher, does he secretly introduce destructive heresies? First, let's look at the word secretly.

Secretly is the Greek word pareisago – which means to introduce surreptitiously; privily bring in. This tells me that under the guise of organized church policy and beliefs, he is teaching or advocating outside the scope of scripture or church doctrines.

The man I know told us that he was an ordained teacher in that particular religion. I knew they ordained Pastors, but teachers? The question is if they thought you were worthy of holding such a title many years ago, are you still adept enough to teach now?

Since joining the group over two years ago I became aware of false teachings. I know how many of you think and trust me, I was asked the same question; did you do or say anything about the teachings? Yes, on several occasions. At one point I left the group and was gone for about six months. A friend who still attended asked me to come back as I was one of the few who attempts to withstand the teacher. I assure you, I have not been called to aggressively confront deeply entrenched and admired Bible teachers; I also know my own personality and I have the propensity to be aggressive – a rather non-productive approach. Nothing changed, in fact, the teacher actually became more adamant in espousing his opinions.

The problems were many, and I attempted to inform the then new Pastor that someone needed to at least monitor the group. It seems that new pastors clean house by firing dissenting staff members, and that is exactly what we saw at this church. However, our renowned teacher is not a paid staff member and apparently of no concern. Two years have come and gone, and even though there is an esteemed church member and former deacon in attendance, to keep the study on the straight and narrow way of truth, he does and says nothing to correct blatant and horrendous falsehoods.

How then do we call it a secret and mutinous attempt if everyone keeps turning their backs and allowing the offender to go on teaching?

Destructive – Gk apōleia and means ruin or loss (physical, spiritual or eternal): - damnable (-nation), destruction, die, perdition, X perish, pernicious ways, waste.

The ruin, loss, destruction, and waste come in the form of misinformed participants who are either mislead or incapable of seeking out the truth. Why should they, as the false teacher has by intimidation implied that the information he gave was true and not to be challenged.

Heresies – Gk hairesis – meaning a choice, that is, (specifically) a party or (abstractly) disunion. The Word Study Dictionary says, a form of religious worship, discipline, or opinion.

One of the main things we hear from this teacher, especially after a Biblical refute of something he has espoused, is, that's my opinion, and that is all that matters. Oh really. In those moments he is clearly in disunion from the Word of God and the doctrines of the church. (As I side note: I often find myself annoyed by church doctrines as they tend to be the rules of man as they attempt to establish a hierarchy.)

• “even denying the Master who bought them,”

At first glance, this seems rather extreme, up to and including a denial of Jesus Christ. It's not quite that direct and requires you looking up the “simple” words.

Denying – Gk arneomai meaning to contradict, that is, disavow, reject, abnegate: - deny, refuse.

The actions and reactions described here are a common occurrence with this individual I am describing, as he contradicts, rejects, and refuses to hear the truth. (By the way, if you were to respond correctly to anything, it should be the truth. Truth in this example is exclusively the Word of God.)

It would seem that all you have to do is consider the words in question: “denying the Master who bought them.” Who brought us to this grand party? Jesus Christ, the Father God. So, in contradicting, disavowing, rejecting and refusal, you are doing just that, denying.

DISAVOW is to deny; to disown; to deny to be true, as a fact or charge respecting one's self; as, he was charged with embezzlement, but he disavows the fact. A man may disavow his name or signature; he may disavow a knowledge of a fact or his concern in a transaction.

If I operate on the principle that God's word is the truth, then to teach in opposition to that Word is to disavow.

• “Many will follow their sensuality,”

Follow – Gk exakoloutheō meaning to follow, to imitate:

Such a simple word, follow, but if we all emulated the practices, lifestyle, and teachings of the false teacher, then we become his imitators, as we live our stunted lives (A huge implication here is, that few of us have the ability to read the Bible and understand it.)

How pathetically sad this idea of following someone like this. Jesus is the one I am aware of who advocated people following Him, although I am sure even Paul the Apostle wrote and told others to emulate him as well.

To follow all aspects of the false teacher I speak of would leave me seriously stunted, judgmental, and legalistic.

Sensuality – Gk aselgeia meaning licentiousness or wantonness.

As I try to understand I am lead to this word licentiousness, and I can't find it in my memory banks; that is why I look things up.

LICEN'TIOUSNESS, n. Excessive indulgence of liberty; contempt of the just restraints of law, morality, and decorum. The licentiousness of authors is justly condemned; the licentiousness of the press is punishable by law.

Anyone who has sat under this brother in Christ knows that he exhibits both of these things traits, every week.

• “and because of them the way of the truth will be maligned;”

Maligned; what a pathetically simple way of saying blasphemed. The Gk word is blasphēmeō meaning to slander, hence to speak lightly or profanely of sacred things:

Slander is defined as A false tale or report maliciously uttered and tending to injure the reputation of another by lessening him in the esteem of his fellow citizens, by exposing him to impeachment and punishment, or by impairing his means of living;

Wow, in Christianity, and among false teachers, the idea of blaspheming the Holy Spirit, and thereby committing the unpardonable sin, is tossed around with frequency. Jesus gave us the clearest and most defined example when He went after a group of Pharisees. The setting: He had just delivered a young man of a demon when the Pharisees began their verbal attacks, saying, He casts them out by the power of the Devil, the enemy. His response:

Mark 3:22-30 The scribes who came down from Jerusalem were saying, "He is possessed by Beelzebul," and "He casts out the demons by the ruler of the demons." 23) And He called them to Himself and began speaking to them in parables, "How can Satan cast out Satan? 24) "If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. 25) "If a house is divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand. 26) "If Satan has risen up against himself and is divided, he cannot stand, but he is finished! 27) "But no one can enter the strong man's house and plunder his property unless he first binds the strong man, and then he will plunder his house. 28) "Truly I say to you, all sins shall be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they utter; 29) but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin"-- 30) because they were saying, "He has an unclean spirit."

Did you catch that? All this was said in response because “they were saying, "He has an unclean spirit."”

Typically, the word blasphemy is used as a method of control (Control, if you do your homework, is a form of witchcraft.) Just for the fun of it, let's see what God has to say about witchcraft.

Deuteronomy 18:9-12 9) "When you enter the land which the LORD your God gives you, you shall not learn to imitate the detestable things of those nations. 10) "There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, one who uses divination, one who practices witchcraft, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, 11) or one who casts a spell, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead. 12) "For whoever does these things is detestable to the LORD; and because of these detestable things the LORD your God will drive them out before you.

Let me ask you a simplistic, childlike question. What is truth? The answer to the question is, God's Word is Truth; plain and simple. So, does God win over the opinion of any man? Without a doubt.

• “and in their greed, they will exploit you with false words;”

Greed is the Greek word pleonexia and means advantage, covetousness.

The word greed tends to force you to look for the money, but that is far from where we need to be thinking right now. I realize this can be a problem for television evangelists and some pastors, but this is just a small town “Bible Study” leader, and he does not get paid.

Because the word advantage is an alternate understanding of the Gk word pleonexia, let's see what the definition of advantage is.

ADV'ANTAGE, n.1. Any state, condition, or circumstance, favorable to success, prosperity, interest, or reputation.

Wait a minute; this man had a reputation; and, he certainly wants to be seen as a success, and, he wants the conditions to be favorable to achieving that goal. But keep in mind that the verse says, “they will exploit you with false words.”

Allow me to give you a grand example of what we hear with consistency.

The generalized statement was made that, everyone that goes to the great white throne is sent to the hell they deserve. Is this a true statement? Absolutely not. How do I know that? Because I have read my Bible; I have a brain, and I choose to use it.

The Great White Throne judgment. Do you realize it only shows up in two locations; one of those is here:

Revelation 20:11-15 Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat upon it, from whose presence earth and heaven fled away, and no place was found for them. 12) And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds. 13) And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one of them according to their deeds. 14) Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. 15) And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

False teachers will dare to assume that no one's name is found written in the book of life and therefore thrown into the lake of fire, but that is not conveyed in Revelation 20:11-15. It merely tells you what is to befall those He does not find listed in the books. It says that the dead, from all time apparently, are raised and brought before this throne. God then, opens the books, and there are several, and He scours those books looking for some act for which He can show mercy. Sadly, for some unfortunate few, He finds nothing, and they are sent to their permanent place of separation.

Now, I said there were two places we find this throne. The second is in Matthew 25. The NASB entitles this section, “The Final Judgment.” Wow, that should have a familiar ring to it, especially since I just gave you the paraphrased version of the final judgment.

Matthew 25:31-46 "But when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne. 32) "All the nations will be gathered before Him; and He will separate them from one another, as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats; 33) and He will put the sheep on His right, and the goats on the left. 34) "Then the King will say to those on His right, 'Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 35) 'For I was hungry, and you gave Me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me something to drink; I was a stranger, and you invited Me in; 36) naked, and you clothed Me; I was sick, and you visited Me; I was in prison, and you came to Me.' 37) "Then the righteous will answer Him, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, and feed You, or thirsty, and give You something to drink? 38) 'And when did we see You a stranger, and invite You in, or naked, and clothe You? 39) 'When did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?' 40) "The King will answer and say to them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.' 41) "Then He will also say to those on His left, 'Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels; 42) for I was hungry, and you gave Me nothing to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me nothing to drink; 43) I was a stranger, and you did not invite Me in; naked, and you did not clothe Me; sick, and in prison, and you did not visit Me.' 44) "Then they themselves also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not take care of You?' 45) "Then He will answer them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.' 46) "These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

So how is this similar to what we saw in Revelation 20?

• Matthew 25 states,“But when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne.”
• Revelation 20 tells us, “Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat upon it,”

There is only one Him, and His name is Jesus. This is relatively easy to ascertain if you keep in mind that the Revelation is a revelation of Jesus Christ. So when we see God in the Revelation we are seeing Jesus.

• In Matthew 25:32 "All the nations will be gathered before Him.”

Here they are not specifically designated as dead or formerly dead folk. I think this throws many off as they cannot extrapolate. Why should this concept of the dead be a problem anyway; especially since we are all eternal in our spirits - that thing made after the image of God.

• In Revelation 20 we see this: “I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, .. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them.

These dead came from everywhere imaginable; the sea, and death and Hades gave up the dead which was in them. One of the problems people have when trying to make this comparison is the idea that only live people are brought to the throne in Matthew 25. Is it a critical error if God's word fails to give you what you think is a scathing omission? Dead or alive, we are all alive eternally in our spirits; we were, by the way, made in the image of God and He is a spirit. So, in the long run, no one is really dead in the sense of answering for our transgression's, are we.

Here is an excellent question and worthy of some thought, especially since it helps our understanding. Since this is the end of time who are the people, we are dealing with as we try to understand those before the throne?

Since the church age, there have only been three people groups. (Note: God does not care where you are from or what color you are. They are:)

• The Jews/Israel;
• The Church – the church is the living breathing organism made up of us, and we, are in Christ.
• And, the nations – those outside of a relationship with Jesus Christ,

A piece of information you theoretically should know, unless of course your time was squandered by a false teacher who made you endure some derisory teaching about backsliding for two months, is that by this time the church will have been caught up to heaven, leaving those Jews that were not part of the church to endure the wrath that is coming. Sadly many who sit in churches will miss out on this catching away and have to endure the wrath as well. Those outside of the first two groups; and remain, are primarily called the nations. The nations are a diverse group that can include religious people, cannibals, brutal bullies, the poor, and the rich.

In terms of timing, the millennial reign has come to an end. Satan is released long enough to deceive the nations - once again, and they surround the 1500 square mile City of God along with its people, thinking that they can kill God. God sends a fire and destroys this uncountable number. It is at this time when the Great White Throne is set up. If I focus on Matthew's account, there is a clear separation of acceptable folks from the bad, with the bad sent off to an eternal hell. Many are shown mercy simply on the basis of some kind act. Revelation 20 is where false teachers like to focus and will advocate that all go to hell, all the while ignoring that God is scouring through these books to find a reason to show mercy. If God, who knows all and sees all, knew who would be destined to hell why then even have books. In Matthew's account, the crowd is separated and seemingly without the aid of these books. This kind of merciless logic conveys a God that merely mocks those destined for hell since He already knows their names and whether they are in the books or not. 

No, God is looking for a reason to show mercy.

Related articles

• Three Surprising Ways Bible Reading with My Kids Has Changed Me

The Second Coming of Babylon. A critique of Mark Hitchcock's book.

Tower of Babel by Lucas van Valckenborch in 1594 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Some time ago I bought a book called, The Second Coming Of Babylon, by Mark Hitchcock. I bought it with the hope that he might bring some explanation, but, as with most things, I do my good intentions got set aside for almost a year. Having read the book recently, I found myself wondering why I purchased this book. Oh yeah, people that I trust have referenced Mark Hitchcock's work as being beneficial.

The premise of the book is a Biblically based treatise on how Babylon is to be physically rebuilt and become a great economic center for the world. I did not know this when I bought the book. I personally, using scripture and logical thought, have concluded that Babylon attains all its greatness through demonic empowerment, powerful, wealthy people, a global banking system, and the foolishness of individuals who think that more government is the answer to everything.

In chapter three, “From the Cradle to the Grave,” the third paragraph states, Man's history – from the cradle to the grave – is tied to this river valley in general … and to Babylon in particular. (The river valley referred to is, the Mesopotamia, the land between the rivers.)

The fourth paragraph of this same chapter tells us that, “History is coming full circle. The focus of world events is cycling back to where it all began.” He goes on to say, under the heading of, A River Runs Through it, that “the paradise of the Garden was destroyed by the Flood in response to the unabated wickedness of man. But after this event man again returned to the Tigris and Euphrates valley. Man returned to Babel. And he will do it again.”

Now I can't disagree with the premise that man went back to Babel, but I can disagree with the concept that man even called this area Babel, as that name did not come until after Nimrod, the mighty warrior. Take a minute to look up Strong's definition of mighty and you get this: ghib-bore', ghib-bore' Intensive from the same as H1397; powerful; by implication warrior, tyrant: - champion, chief, X excel, giant. Genesis chapter 10 is where we are introduced to Nimrod. Scripturally our evidence for the beginnings of Babel/Babylon comes from,

Genesis 10:10 KJV And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar.

Perhaps it is an assumption but logic says there was no Babel prior to Nimrod. What we do have is this, all this was in the land of Shinar. Hold that thought as this land of Shinar will come back to our thinking shortly.

Still, in chapter three, the title of the next section, A City and a Tower, Mark Hitchcock conveys, based upon the definitions we get of the word mighty, that Nimrod was “the first world dictator and his capital city was Babylon. In this sense, Nimrod prefigures the final great world ruler, the Antichrist, who will also locate his world commercial capital at Babylon.”

The book goes on to say, “They settled down in the land of Shinar at Babel with a three part plan:

1. To build a city,
2. To build a tower reaching to the heavens,
3. To make a name for themselves (to glorify man.)”

The scriptural reference given is Genesis 11:1-9 KJV

And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech. 2) And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there. 3) And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for mortar. 4) And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. 5) And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men built. 6) And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. 7) Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech. 8) So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. 9) Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

An analysis of the premise put forward in this section (A City and a Tower,) demonstrates much supposition and fallacy.

• “the first world dictator”
  Based on the definition of the word mighty it is not difficult to see why Mark Hitchcock would say that Nimrod was the first world dictator. However, this is not what is taught in church. How would most of you know this?
• “and his capital city was Babylon”
  When you look at the scriptures referenced, which Mark Hitchcock uses to base his claim, you cannot find the name Nimrod in there, but you do find the word “they” used over and over. You should not forget that “they” all spoke one language, and, at this point in time, had one mind set – evil.
  One might assume that Nimrod is certainly playing a role in this but it's not defined in the passages used. Verse 4 tells us that “They said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.” After being scattered and having their language changed, they left off building the city and called it Babel to symbolize their fate. The process of changing languages and being scattered would have been confusing at best and discouraging. The obvious fact is that plans and dreams go right out the window when you cannot communicate. Even if Nimrod is able to force people to build his so called “capital city”, you would think that there would be a need to gain work force numbers once again. Genesis 11:1-9 does not make the author's case as he presents it.
• “ In this sense, Nimrod prefigures the final great world ruler, the Antichrist,”
  Based upon Mr. Hitchcock's presumption, all we know is that Nimrod is a world dictator. In actuality, the world was still rather small at this point. What happened just a few short years prior? A massive flood that consumed every living thing. Our assumption, based on the potential exponential explosion of human births, is that there are once again an uncountable number of people upon the earth. We have nothing to tell us any differently, so let's run with that idea. We also must assume that they live in one geographical area, that we call the world.
  How then does Nimrod equate to the final “great” world ruler, the Antichrist? Wouldn't he have to bear some of the known attributes such as: promoting a seven-year treaty among many? Peace it seems, was never a part of Nimrod's vocabulary.
  Many of the details about the Antichrist come from the book of Daniel.
  Daniel 9:27 KJV And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
  The Antichrist based on the pattern of Antiochus Epiphanes will:
  • “confirm the covenant with many for one week”
    Nimrod does nothing like this.
  • “and in the midst of the week, he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease,”
    There is no temple or parallel to it, therefore this argument is null and void.
  • “and for the overspreading of abominations, he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.”
    Without a temple, Nimrod cannot make it desolate. Is it possible that this could be a reference to something else? Not likely as the name Nimrod only shows up in three locations in scripture:
    Genesis 10:8,9 KJV) And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth. He was a mighty hunter before the LORD: wherefore it is said, Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the LORD.

1 Chronicles 1:10 KJV) And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be mighty upon the earth.

One of those, however, seems to bear a huge significance as the descendants of Nimrod are laid to waste when they step within the borders of Israel.

Micah 5:6 KJV) And they shall waste the land of Assyria with the sword, and the land of Nimrod in the entrances thereof: thus shall he deliver us from the Assyrian, when he comes into our land, and when he treads within our borders.

Because of this, it is safe to say that if Nimrod comes close to any one in scriptural detail it would be Gog – the one who amasses great armies against Israel and is killed on the mountains of Israel in the last days.

The book tries to define these three points - (1)To build a city and, (2) to build a tower reaching to the heavens, (3)To make a name for themselves (to glorify man.)”

Points (1) and, (2) seem to be closely related, so let's see if I can get anything out of this if I look strictly at the Scriptures Hitchcock is basing his presumptions on.

Now the whole earth used the same language and the same words. It came about as they journeyed east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there. They said to one another, "Come, let us make bricks and burn them thoroughly." And they used brick for stone, and they used tar for mortar. They said, "Come, let us build for ourselves a city, and a tower whose top will reach into heaven, and let us make for ourselves a name, otherwise we will be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth." Genesis 11:1-4 NASB)

What can I gather from this?

• That everyone, at that time, spoke the same language.
  Well, that makes sense as we are only generations from Noah – one of eight souls that survived the flood.
• “ It came about as they journeyed east”
  Now, I might conjecture that they only traveled east but that is not likely. The story, it seems, is only focused on one group. I can assure you that every group spoke the same language. Another assumption would be to say: That this group was the only group and they happened to go East.
  See the problem in these statements, we have no other biblical history build an argument from. One of the things you have to realize is that from Adam to the flood is well over one-thousand years. That is a long time to hold the memory of a particular garden; so to think that these people were doing just that is conjecture.
• “ they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there.”

Assuming that the size of the group (of kinfolk) is large enough, then there would be conflicts. We know from the life of Abraham that most folks were shepherds of some variety, and what happened to him? His nephew Lot's flocks and herdsmen conflicted and they had to separate.

Moving to Shinar might have provided arable land at that time. What we know of the region today does not give that impression. There is no reason to make a bigger story out of this as ample opportunity will arise.

• “They said to one another, "Come, let us make bricks and burn them thoroughly." And they used brick for stone, and they used tar for mortar.”
  This merely demonstrates that some, at least, are willing to make a permanent home here.
• “They said, "Come, let us build for ourselves a city and a tower whose top will reach into heaven,”

As I talk about events that we see in Scripture there is a common assumption that the time frame only lasts about five minutes; that is never the case, and, it is not the case the case here. How do I know that? Because after gaining the skills to build homes they are now aware that they have the capabilities to build something larger.

To build a tower can carry multiple implications, for a tower can imply strength. Considering the nature and character of Nimrod – a warrior tyrant, with the strong possibilities that he was a giant of a man, the demonstration of strength and power is exactly what he wanted to convey.

The Word Study Dictionary tells us this about the tower:

mig̱dāl: A masculine noun indicating a tower. It refers to various kinds of towers: the Tower of Babel (Gen_11:4); a watch-tower in a vineyard (Isa_5:2); a tower built into a wall (2Ch_14:7 [6]); storage structures (1Ch_27:25); central defense towers in the centers of cities (Jdg_9:51-52). In Neh_8:4, the word refers to a structure for someone to stand on in order to address a crowd.

Everything about this description fits what I said about Nimrod's motives and why.

Look up the word tower and this is what the Word Study Dictionary gives us:

šāmayim: A masculine noun meaning sky, heaven, abode, firmament, air, stars. Although the word is plural or dual in form, it can be translated into English as singular or plural depending on the context. The word describes everything God made besides the earth.

So, although the practical aspects of Nimrod's reasons may be valid the larger influence – the voices of those who are part of the city seem to win. This tower was a direct and aggressive action against God. And, if you notice, Nimrod's name is not directly associated with the tower. How do I know this? Because Genesis 11:4 tells us that “they said.” To imply Nimrod played a role in this is (here I go again,) pure conjecture. [Do you know what that word conjecture means? It means speculation, possibility, or guess. Most people use the word to convey an unfounded opinion as truth.] If we do not have direct conclusive evidence, then it is purely circumstantial evidence.

Point three - “to make a name for themselves (to glorify man.)”

• “and let us make for ourselves a name, otherwise we will be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth."

Again I turn to the Word Study Dictionary. It gives us: šēm: A masculine noun meaning a name, fame. It is what specifically identifies a person or anything: God's name, "I am who I am" (Exo_3:15); or the name Yahweh, LORD, which is in small capital letters in English (Psa_5:11 [12]); a person's name (Gen_3:20); names of animals (Gen_2:19). To make a name for oneself means to attain a renowned reputation (Gen_11:4; 2Sa_8:13); as when God made Abraham's name great (Gen_12:2). To become famous is to have one's name spread through the land (Eze_16:14).

What can I gather from the explanation above?

• That this is a direct affront to any god but their own, and apparently they were choosing to be their own god.
• That it is a method of attaining a reputation.
  The underlying motive is pure selfishness. Isn't that the common problem for all of us?

Hitchcock states that “The city and the tower represent the two aspects of Babylon that continue today: Political power balanced against religious rebellion and apostasy.

To say “Political power balanced against religious rebellion and apostasy,” doesn't even make sense to me. What are you trying to convey when you say that power must be balanced against apostasy? Are you attempting to say that power will turn men's hearts back to God? Based upon the common supposition that power is what the world constantly tries to gain, and, it is in opposition to anything that God desires for us, the statement isn't logical or right. How can a hypothesis like this be right when we are told that everything in the world is in opposition to God. Who then, is doing the balancing? God?

I give you 1 John where we find one of the strongest arguments against the world's system.

Do not love the world nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world. The world is passing away, and also its lusts; but the one who does the will of God lives forever. 1 John 2:15-17 NASB)

Religious rebellion and apostasy can almost be the same thing, and political power has nothing to do with God except that Scripture tells us

“ The king's heart is in the hand of the LORD, as the rivers of water: he turns it wherever he will.” Proverbs 21:1 KJV)

What do I gather from all this? That God is in control, of political power as well as people.

Mark Hitchcock goes to say, “The city they built represents the political unity of the city of Babylon.”

Unity, are you serious. The two things that gave them unity, much like prisoners transported on a slave ship, was the oppressive fear of death exerted by someone like Nimrod, that and the knowledge they all spoke the same language (by the way, they were all related to each other.)

Is it a coincidence that God noticed this unity and changed their language as he dispersed them around the globe. What became of their political unity when that happened?

If they ever regained some form of unity it was put to use building the “the city and the tower.”

Mark Hitchcock introduces us to John Walvoord who gives us a summary of the Babylonian “religious” system.

• He tells us that Nimrod had a wife known as Semiramis.
  This is never told to us in scripture, therefore we must trust that there is some history of their relationship. I, personally, do not believe that God thought for a second that you would need some deep, religious thinker for you to understand this stuff. Introducing someone like Semiramis may help our understanding, or, it can cloud the issue. If there was a religious system, it was called selfishness. It does not take much thought to see that at work in every sinful action we indulge in.
• Apparently, Semiramis had a son, who, because of his miraculous conception (whatever that means) and was therefore named Tammuz.
  Tammuz in effect was a false fulfillment of the promise of the seed of the woman given to Eve (Genesis 3:15.)

“And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel." NASB

We are told, “Various religious practices were observed in connection with the false Babylonian religion, including recognition of the mother and child as God and of creating an order of virgins who became religious prostitutes.”

Once again we have nothing from Scripture that tells us this information, we then must rely on someone else to fill in the blanks. The process of reliance tends to subject us to deception and is any thing but comfortable in my opinion. 

Is it possible that I can attain valid information through logical thought and observance of what the Word of God gives me? Yes, and obviously not all these details Walvoord is giving us allow for logical thought. Perhaps it is enough to understand that the people involved in the building of Babylon and the tower, did so to promote someone's selfish desires. I came to that conclusion without all the bizarre details about Semiramis.

Walvoord ends his summary with the most valuable statement of the entire book.

“Babylon then is the symbol of apostasy and blasphemous substitution of idol-worship for the worship of God in Christ.”

• • Apostasy – Apostasy is the abandonment or renunciation of what you know is right. Having a knowledge of God and His ways and then setting them aside is apostasy.
  • Blasphemous – A perverted and intentional misdirect, in this case, away from the truth about God.

I often add, how would I know that? Did you notice a few paragraphs ago, that I mentioned that they were all related? This fact takes them back to one man, Noah. While the information about Noah is somewhat cryptic in the Old Testament (a thorough investigation will demonstrate that Noah lineage was untouched by the influence of fallen angels having sex with humans.) The most telling information about Noah comes from the writer of the letter to the Hebrews – Jews.

Hebrews 11:7 By faith Noah, being warned by God about things not yet seen, in reverence prepared an ark for the salvation of his household, by which he condemned the world, and became an heir of the righteousness which is according to faith.

Knowing that Noah was a righteous man, one can only assume that the offering of sacrifices and the relationship one can have with the God who says His name is I AM. Sadly, we find that four generations later, no one remembers the God of their fathers. That tells us that the relationship has to be personal; that is the primary method of keeping yourself untwisted by life.

If we focus on what Walvoord tells us we find the most valid statement of what modern day Babylon represents: “Babylon then is the symbol of apostasy and blasphemous substitution of idol-worship for the worship of God in Christ.”

I recently posted an answer to a friends statement/question about whether there are female angels. The example he used was from the prophet Zechariah.

Zechariah 5:9 NASB Then I lifted up my eyes and looked, and there two women were coming out with the wind in their wings; and they had wings like the wings of a stork, and they lifted up the ephah between the earth and the heavens.

The interesting aspect of this is how it all gets tied back to Babylon and the plain of Shinar. In Zechariah 5:8 God explains that the woman in the basket is wickedness. The answer God gives should be a huge clue that we are to be looking for something spiritual, not physical as Mark Hitchcock asserts.

The Life Application Study Bible commentary has a rather large paragraph about this subject, but only one small aspect makes any sense to me and it goes like this, “The woman in a basket was carried away "to the land of Babylonia," which had become a symbol for the center of world idolatry and wickedness.”

Zechariah 5:6 MSG I said, "What in the world is that?" He said, "This is a bushel basket on a journey. It holds the sin of everyone, everywhere."

While I can grasp the idea that it contains the sin of everyone; our sins are completely characterized by one person - this woman referred to as “it.” However, it is not, at this moment in Scripture, directed at everyone. It is, however, expressly directed at Israel; And, we know this because it says in Zechariah 5:6, “This is their appearance in all the land.” Can the world be enticed and therefore included? Absolutely. We are all taken in by the abominations of the earth. You know that Satan offered Jesus the kingdoms of this world and their glory. Pursue this in Matthew 4. Jesus responded to Satan with, “It is written,..” Israel, being the focus and center of God's attention, is God's focus in the statement, “This is their appearance in all the land.”

What we may be seeing here is the representation of the Harlot, the Mother of Harlots.

Revelation 17:5-6 NASB and on her forehead a name was written, a mystery, "BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH." 6) And I saw the woman drunk with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the witnesses of Jesus. When I saw her, I wondered greatly.

Note how it describes Babylon as the mother of harlots, AND of the abominations of the earth.

Revelation 18:2 NASB And he cried out with a mighty voice, saying, "Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great! She has become a dwelling place of demons and a prison of every unclean spirit, and a prison of every unclean and hateful bird.

We understand that a harlot entices you to give up your virginity, your dignity, destroy your marriage, and end your relationship with important and vital people in your life, like the wife; God. Now, look at the other descriptives: Babylon, a spiritual entity, is the woman drunk with the blood of saints and witnesses of Jesus. Isn't it clear that this harlot is a murderer? It is also the dwelling place of demons and a prison of every unclean spirit.

Mark Hitchcock's assertion that Babylon must be rebuilt and become the economic capital of the world is nonsense, especially since, according to him it has not been destroyed as yet. In your Bibles, Revelation 18 concludes with Babylon, the great city, being thrown down with violence and not be found any longer. In reality, that throwing down, physically, happened not long after perhaps Darius. Wikipedia tells us: It has been estimated that Babylon was the largest city in the world from c. 1770 to 1670 BC, and again between c. 612 and 320 BC. With some solid dates, we can associate the destruction with the Alexandrian empire.

Although I read the majority of the book I honestly could not take any more, and in doing my critique here, I have not made it out of chapter three in quoting examples. I just do not have the time nor the patience.

I believe we are in the last minutes of the Church on this earth, and that directly impacts my ability to reach people. Why is this important? Because, having been raised in church I can tell you that false and misleading teaching is going on constantly and the majority of “Christians” do not read for themselves, do not verify that the information being shoved down their throat is correct, nor do they have any grasp of where to look to validate some teaching.

Is there something misleading with Mark Hitchcock's treatise, absolutely, for it prompts us to spend our time looking for things that divert from the truth in God's word. We have been prodded to focus on time wasting events and energies since Christ rose from the dead. How about we spend our time looking at the Word of God, and using our brains. I do not believe this book of mysteries is a mystery to the spirit filled believer. 

Related articles

• The Bible's Prologue Concludes

Behold it's coming. Ezekiel 39:7-10.

I closed the last study of Ezekiel 39 ending on verse 6. Why then bring it into this continuation of chapter 39? Because it helps to establish context.

Ezekiel 39:5-7 NASB "You will fall on the open field; for it is I who have spoken," declares the Lord GOD. 6) "And I will send fire upon Magog and those who inhabit the coastlands in safety; they will know that I am the LORD. 7) "My holy name I will make known in the midst of My people Israel, and I will not let My holy name be profaned anymore. And the nations will know that I am the LORD, the Holy One in Israel.

Taken up from the remotest parts of the north and brought against the mountains of Israel, Gog and all those with him will come. Few of us realize we are dealing with the Scythians; fewer understand that the Scythians extended into the far eastern regions of China, Siberia, the Western European nations, and South into Egypt. 

All this is done with one purpose in mind, that “the nations will know that I am the LORD, the
Holy One in Israel.”

Many are confused when reading this, wondering when the event takes place. The confusion carries through to our understanding of end times events and Revelation. Since there is little to define when this war we see in Ezekiel 38,39 takes place let's take a logical approach. 

When the rapture takes place it seems to be synchronized with the arrival of the Antichrist.
Why is a statement like this valid? Because we know that a man, we call the Antichrist, will make a peace treaty with many for a seven-year period. (We assume that Israel is a part of that treaty but you will find nothing that indicates the treaty will be with Israel.)

What we see in Daniel is a definition of what Antiochus Epiphanes will do. Unfortunately, Antiochus is a precursor for the Antichrist, who will perform in the same manner.

Daniel 9:27 NASB "And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate."

We also have the Apostle Paul's words.

2 Thessalonians 2:3-4NASB 3) Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4) who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God.

I highlighted a select portion as the rest of the sentence applies to the man we know as the false prophet. This becomes more clear when you read it in the Complete Jewish Bible.


2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 CJB Don't let anyone deceive you in any way. For the Day will not come until after the Apostasy has come and the man who separates himself from Torah has been revealed, the one destined for doom. 4) He will oppose himself to everything that people call a god or make an object of worship; he will put himself above them all so that he will sit in the Temple of God and proclaim that he himself is God.

The words I want you to pay attention to are, “the man who separates himself from Torah.” This would imply that observance of the Torah was an integrated aspect of his life. Perhaps some information about what the Quran teaches about this Jesus may help.

The following is from Wikipedia:

“In Islam, ʿĪsā ibn Maryām (Arabic: عيسى بن مريم‎, lit. 'Jesus, son of Mary'‎), or Jesus, is understood to be the penultimate prophet and messenger of Allah (God) and al-Masih, the Arabic term for Messiah(Christ), sent to guide the Children of Israel (banī isrā'īl in Arabic) with a new revelation: al-Injīl (Arabic for "the Gospel")

Islam traditionally teaches the rejection of divinity, that Jesus was not God incarnate, nor the Son of God and, according to some interpretations of the Quran, the death and crucifixion is widely denied and not believed to have occurred.

A second early image of Jesus is an end-time figure, arising mostly from the Hadith. Muslim tradition constructs a narrative similar to found in Christian theology, seeing Jesus awaiting the end of time when he will descend to the earth and fight the Antichrist, championing the cause of Islam, when after doing so he will point to the primacy of Muhammad and die a natural death.

According to Islamic tradition which describes this graphically, Jesus' descent will be in the midst of wars fought by al-Mahdi (lit. "the rightly guided one"), known in Islamic eschatology as the redeemer of Islam, against al-Masīh ad-Dajjāl (the Antichrist "false messiah") and his followers. Jesus will descend at the point of a white arcade, east of Damascus, dressed in yellow robes—his head anointed. He will say prayer behind al-Mahdi then join him in his war against the Dajjal. Jesus, considered as a Muslim, will abide by the Islamic teachings. Eventually, Jesus will slay the Antichrist, and then everyone who is one of the People of the Book (ahl al-kitāb, referring to Jews and Christians) will believe in him. Thus, there will be one community, that of Islam

Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until the son of Mary (i.e. Jesus) descends amongst you as a just ruler, he will break the cross, kill the pigs, and abolish the Jizya tax. Money will be in abundance so that nobody will accept it (as charitable gifts)." — Narrated by Abu Huraira

After the death of al-Mahdi, Jesus will assume leadership. This is a time associated in Islamic narrative with universal peace and justice. Islamic texts also allude to the appearance of Ya'juj and Ma'juj (known also as Gog and Magog), ancient tribes which will disperse and cause disturbance on earth. God, in response to Jesus' prayers, will kill them by sending a type of worm in the napes of their necks. Jesus' rule is said to be around forty years, after which he will die. Muslims will then perform the funeral prayer for him and then bury him in the city of Medina in a grave left vacant beside Muhammad, Abu Bakr, and Umar (companions of Muhammad and the first and second Sunni caliphs (Rashidun) respectively.”

Although I am not finding it now, I have come across the clear statement that the Islamic Jesus is of the lineage of Aaron. That would make him eligible to be a priest in the temple. What a coincidence since the temple will be rebuilt and priests will be necessary to perform the sacrifices once again. If a priest separates himself from the Torah, as the CJB tells us, the deception will be great, and this is precisely what Jesus was talking about when he said, see to it that you are not deceived.

Matthew 24:4-5 NASB And Jesus answered and said to them, "See to it that no one misleads you. 5) "For many will come in My name, saying, 'I am the Christ,' and will mislead many.

Matthew 24:24 NASB "For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect.

The astute should understand that Jesus was talking to and about Jews. The elect then would be Jewish leadership, such as high priests, chief priests, and Pharisees.

Are we, the body of Christ, then immune to deception?
Hardly; the sad part of this is that we, the body of Christ, are neck deep in deception. We have been led to believe that the government is our friend; that the church will only tell us the truth, always; and that our brothers and sisters in Christ have our best interests in mind. The worst of is that we have come to accept a nature and character of God/Christ that is not true, and it is our church leaders and their assigned teachers that have transmitted and supported those falsehoods.

So let's briefly talk about one of those falsehoods we believe; that God is not true to His word.
What has God ever done that would make you believe that His word is not valid? 

Many refer to Jonah and the message he eventually delivered to Nineveh. Everyone seems to understand that there was no mercy included in the message; and yet, after they, on the whole, repented, God relented in His actions. The evidence we have for this was Jonah's own statement at the end of the story where he said, I knew you would do that.

Do what? Show them mercy. Jonah, it seems, understood God's nature and character. With that in mind, is God a liar? Not at all. In time Nineveh returned to their old ways and God did exactly what He said; they were destroyed.

Ezekiel 39:8 NASB "Behold, it is coming and it shall be done," declares the Lord GOD. "That is the day of which I have spoken.

“That is the day of which I have spoken.”
References to, “the day,” can be found throughout the Bible. Most of those apply to the time surrounding Christ's physical return. However, the context of Ezekiel and the fact that Israel does not appear to be destroyed at this point is in opposition to what many commentators assume. I do not believe this to be a direct connection to the time of God's wrath and therefore the destruction of Israel.

The evidence to back up my belief lies the fact that the armies of Gog are, for the most part, preemptively destroyed on the mountains of Israel. Since most of Israel's enemies have Jerusalem as the focus of their destruction, and, Gog, it seems, does not make it that far, we might presume that Israel sustains no damage. Remember, Israel is a country of farmers, villages, and the drive for Jews to return to the homeland - called Aliyah. So for Israel to sustains deaths in numbers exceeding thirty thousand will not be that unusual during the attack by Gog.

Is it appropriate to call this God's wrath against Israel? Perhaps, but I do not see a direct correlation. Since everyone and everything is a tool in God's hands, then yes, it is clear that God is showing the world that it is He that saved Israel, regardless of the numbers killed in the process.

Perhaps, but I do not see a direct correlation. Since everyone and everything is a tool in God's hands, then yes, it is clear that God is showing the world that it is He that saved Israel, regardless of the numbers killed in the process.
The obvious factor here is that God has spoken to Ezekiel in the past about this very issue. God seems to have an emphatic emphasis regardless of whether the timing is well over 3000 years in the future.

Ezekiel 39:7 NASB "My holy name I will make known in the midst of My people Israel; and I will not let My holy name be profaned anymore. And the nations will know that I am the LORD, the Holy One in Israel.

“My holy name I will make known in the midst of My people Israel;”
Is it possible that Israel forgot His name?

Hardly; the verse suggests that they really don't care. God will see to that He regains his place and importance once again. The Bible in Basic English translates it this way, “And I will make clear my holy name among my people Israel;”

“ and I will not let My holy name be profaned anymore.”
Profaned also means to be defiled or polluted. Webster's dictionary defines profaned as: violated; treated with irreverence or abuse.

So, in conjunction with making His holy name known He will not allow anyone to treat His name with irreverence or abuse.

“And the nations will know that I am the LORD, the Holy One in Israel.”
Although we did not cover it, it has been spoken of before.

Ezekiel 36:20-21"When they came to the nations where they went, they profaned My holy name, because it was said of them, 'These are the people of the LORD; yet they have come out of His land.' 21) "But I had concern for My holy name, which the house of Israel had profaned among the nations where they went. NASB

Suddenly there is a shift in thought from having God's name treated with irreverence, to what becomes of the armaments of those killed on the mountains of Israel?

Oh and, there is also the commentaries that convey that all of Israel will be destroyed; if that is the case, then who are these people that come out and gather up the weapons for firewood?

Ezekiel 39:9-10 NASB "Then those who inhabit the cities of Israel will go out and make fires with the weapons and burn them, both shields and bucklers, bows and arrows, war clubs and spears, and for seven years they will make fires of them. 10) "They will not take wood from the field or gather firewood from the forests, for they will make fires with the weapons; and they will take the spoil of those who despoiled them and seize the plunder of those who plundered them," declares the Lord GOD.

“Then those who inhabit the cities of Israel”
It is an assumption to think that these are Israelites doing the gathering. Why say that? Because at some point two-thirds of Israel is killed. So, it is possible that invaders are living in confiscated homes. I think this is a non-credible stretch to think this is anything other than Israel doing the collecting.

“will go out and make fires with the weapons and burn them, both shields and bucklers, bows and arrows, war clubs and spears, and for seven years they will make fires of them.”
Considering what many weapons are made of now, why would anyone burn something inside their home that probably burns toxic? However, even to this day, an AK47 is still mass produced in wood. Note, in the age of modern weapons, the mention of arrows, war clubs, and spears. Is this merely an allusion to modern weapons? Teachers like Chuck Missler allude to these weapons being nuclear in some way; the problem with that is the inherent safety issues involved. How would the average homeowner harness nuclear power for seven years?

Finally, there is the time frame, seven years.
This should be a huge clue as to when this happens. Since the Antichrist signs a treaty with many for seven years, then we should be leaning toward this war occurring just before the onset of the time of wrath.
Related articles
The Character of God from the Book of Romans