*Editor’s Note: Below are questions submitted to Dr. Sam Waldron at an Eschatology Conference. Since these questions and answers could be helpful for a broader audience, we are posting them here as a series. Click the following numbers to read other parts of this series: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.
Why do you believe our Baptist forefathers were incorrect when they taught that the office of the pope was and is antichrist?
It is well-known among our small circle of Reformed Baptists that I take some exception to the statement of 1689 26:4 which asserts “… the Pope of Rome … is that antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church against Christ and all that is called God; whom the Lord shall destroy with the brightness of his coming.” Let me explain my position.
First, I do not hesitate to say that the Pope is an antichrist. He and the false doctrines his church teaches are certainly antichristian. My difference is only my unwillingness to say that the institution of the papacy is the antichrist predicted in 2 Thessalonians 2.
Second, let me emphasize that it is clearly to 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12 that the Confession is alluding. The prooftext given for this statement is 2 Thessalonians 2:2-9. This use of that passage is, in my view, mistaken because the passage clearly refers to a little season before Christ returns. During that little season, there will rise a future, personal antichrist who will deceive the whole world.
Third, this little season of the rise of a personal antichrist is corroborated by the teaching of Revelation 20:1-10 (understood in an amillennial way) that after the thousand years, there will be a short time in which Satan is loosed to deceive the nations for the purpose of raising global and universal persecution of the church. Though the whole gospel age is a time of tribulation (Rev. 1:9), there will be a short time of intensified and global persecution before Christ’s return. This amillennial understanding corresponds exceedingly well with the prediction of 2 Thessalonians 2 of a future rise of a personal antichrist at the end of the age, during which a spirit of deception will cloud the minds of the entire world and lead them astray.
In fact, in the Doctrine of Last Things, in chapter 11, I show a compelling parallel between the timelines and structures of Revelation 20 and 2 Thessalonians 2 in a chart. Both the period described in Revelation 20 and 2 Thessalonians begin with a long period of the restraint of evil in the world. Following this, the restraint is taken away. After the restraint is taken away, there is a time of terrible deception of the nations. Finally, after this short period of final deception, the antichrist is destroyed, and Satan is burned up in the lake of fire. These incredible parallels show that the two passages, though under different imagery, describe the same historical period.
To repeat and summarize my argument: these parallels (and they are confirmed by many other passages) show that there is not only tribulation throughout the gospel age, but a specific period of tribulation for the church at its end. They also show that, though there are many antichrists who arise through this age (1 John 2:18), there is a final antichrist during this terrible last tumult. The ideas of a personal antichrist and a specific period of tribulation tend to confirm each other.
Fourth, the notion that the institution of the papacy is the antichrist is the starting-point, heart, and centerpiece of the historicist understanding of prophecy. The historicist understanding is that prophecy gives us a symbolic step-by-step unfolding of the present age. In many different ways, this historicist understanding of prophecy and especially of the Book of Revelation has been proven wrong. I suggest that if anyone doubts this, they read Mark Jones account of Thomas Goodwin’s historicist interpretation of Revelation in the work on Puritan Theology he co-authored with Joel Beeke.
Given that you are optimistic in your amillennialism, isn’t it possible that the result of gospel expansion in the world is a transformative effect on societies and communities?
Undoubtedly, the gospel as it spreads throughout the world will have a transformative effect on societies and communities. At the same time, we must not forget the paradigm of the parable of the wheat and weeds. I discuss this in chapter 22 of the Doctrine of Last Things. It teaches that the growth of the good seed will not overwhelm or uproot the bad seed. Rather, Jesus suggested that both would grow together until the harvest at the end of the world (Matthew 13:30). This reminds us that the purpose of the gospel is not to transform the Gentile kingdoms of the world. It is rather call out of them a great multitude whom no man can number and prepare them to enter into the glory of the age to come. The fact is that the response of evil to the growth of the good seed grows worse. While there is certainly a ripple effect of transformation in cultures and nations from the gospel, the end result is not the transformation of the world or the production of a millennial era of peace, prosperity, and righteousness. Rather, the dark world rebels against the light of the gospel and is driven into even worse darkness.
Should New Covenant Christians and churches be concerned at all with transforming culture?
The key issue here is what is meant by “transforming culture.” My answer depends on what this phrase assumes.
I think for some, this phrase assumes that we should have as a goal a transformed culture and, by implication, a transformed world. As I have said in a previous question, the Bible does not hold out to us the prospect of a transformed culture and world as a result of the cultural influence of the ripple effects of the gospel. It holds out the prospect of good and evil growing side by side until the end of the age (Matt. 13:30). We have the promise and prospect of a worldwide church, but we do not have the promise and prospect of a transformed world culture.
But having said that, it is, of course, inevitable that the law of God written in the hearts of believers will influence their approach to every area of life. From this perspective, we must say that, of course, New Covenant Christians should and will be concerned with transforming culture. We may add that we can expect—in spite of the opposition of the evil seed and their being made worse by the gospel’s influence—that remarkable transformations in culture will be affected by the Christian world and life view. Wonderful cultural results will be achieved. Terrible cultures of evil will be mitigated by the influence of Christians living Christianly. The church should be a microcosm of the transformation of personal relationships and fellowship that shines as a light on a hill (Matt. 5:13-16).
It is not, then, a question of either cultural influence or no cultural influence. It is a question of the focus and hope of the Christian. That focus must be on the growth of the church of Christ throughout the world. The focus is not the transformation of culture. That is a secondary, though important, matter.
Dr. Sam Waldron is the Academic Dean of CBTS and professor of Systematic Theology. He is also one of the pastors of Grace Reformed Baptist Church in Owensboro, KY. Dr. Waldron received a B.A. from Cornerstone University, an M.Div. from Trinity Ministerial Academy, a Th.M. from Grand Rapids Theological Seminary, and a Ph.D. from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. From 1977 to 2001 he was a pastor of the Reformed Baptist Church of Grand Rapids, MI. Dr. Waldron is the author of numerous books including A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, The End Times Made Simple, Baptist Roots in America, To Be Continued?, and MacArthur’s Millennial Manifesto: A Friendly Response.
