Deep Dive into Eschatology and Critique of Dispensationalism - Jay Dyer

[00:00:05]What's up, man? How are you?

[00:00:06]>> Good. How are you?

[00:00:08]>> I'm good, dude. I just watched your debate with the missed patriot. That was so entertaining.

[00:00:14]>> All right. How did Jesus set up a church after he died?

[00:00:17]>> Jesus sets up the church explicitly when he gives the the keys to Peter in Matthew 16. And he says, >> he didn't start the church.

[00:00:25]>> He did start the church. His apostles are the college that he gives the Holy Spirit to.

[00:00:30]>> So people So the apostles went to college and then they started the church. So it's a man-made. Like I said, >> they went to college. You don't even know what the college of the apostles.

[00:00:38]>> Stupid [ __ ] words against you, dude.

[00:00:40]The church was made by >> My stupid [ __ ] words.

[00:00:42]>> That's the church.

[00:00:43]>> You think the college of the apostles is a stupid [ __ ] word that I made up?

[00:00:47]>> The church was made by men. Yes or no?

[00:00:51]>> No. It's You're You don't even know what the college of the apostles is. You're You're literally an idiot. Hold on. The apostles were The apostles were men.

[00:00:59]Yeah.

[00:00:59]>> Oh my gosh, dude.

[00:01:01]>> So-called debate.

[00:01:03]>> Yeah. Yeah, exactly. That was You know what's so funny? I don't know if you've seen his his feed.

[00:01:08]>> No, I just immediately checked out. I haven't looked.

[00:01:11]>> Bro, he's like he's over on his feed like, well, you know, Jay was just too sensitive, man. Like, I called him a [ __ ] and he he just couldn't handle it. So, it looks like I won the debate.

[00:01:23]It's like, dude, like it's so ridiculous.

[00:01:27]>> Yeah, he he won. Uh-huh.

[00:01:28]>> Yeah. Yeah.

[00:01:29]>> I concede. I concede. Here you go. Clip it. He He beat me.

[00:01:34]>> Yeah, it was that that was that was fantastic. Um, thank you for doing that.

[00:01:38]He I just I I see that guy talk a lot of smack on the timeline and it was >> Yeah, that's why I was like calling him out. I was like, "All right, enough of this dude."

[00:01:48]>> I know. And it Well, it was so funny.

[00:01:49]Like I was telling my roommates, I watched it with one of my roommates and I was like I was explaining to him. I was like, "Dude, like this guy like this guy has no idea who he's walking into a debate with." The Misfit Patriot. I was like, "This guy has no idea who he's walking into a debate with. He is about to get utterly annihilated." And uh yeah, it was that was a good 20 a good usage of 25 minutes of my time. But I had a couple questions on your perspective of Sure.

[00:02:16]>> um a few of the things that you were sharing in that debate. So, uh, you guys started to get into Daniel 9 and you mentioned that the um the the orthodox position or maybe this was the apostolic position on Daniel 9 is that that was those were messianic prophecies about the the first advent of Christ. Is that correct?

[00:02:37]>> For example, Athanasius has an exodus of this passage and it's a reference to the first advent. Correct.

[00:02:43]>> Okay. So, um, yeah, I wanted to ask you about that because I've only ever heard the Protestant, um, interpretation of Daniel 9. And so, when when I read through Daniel 9, when I go to verses 25 through 27, which I've typically heard uh described as about the Antichrist, in um in verse 27, it says, "He will confirm a covenant with many for one seven. And in the middle of the seven, he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. and at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation until the end that is decreed is poured out on him. I is Athanasius's position or your position that this is about Jesus as opposed to the antichrist.

[00:03:25]>> Yeah. So let me read first. So I'll read it in the So we have a different Old Testament between Protestants and Orthodox because we use the Septuagent and most Protestants use the U Maseretic text. So we'll read both. I'm not because off the top of my head I don't recall exactly if they're different, but we'll see. So our text says 70 weeks are determined for your people. For us, this is it's 70 weeks of weeks. So, it's 490.

[00:04:01]To end sin, to wipe out lawlessness, and to atone for wrongdoing, and to bring in everlasting righteous right righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the holy of holies. So, for us, those are all things that Christ accomplishes and does at the first advent. Know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the word uh to be answered and to build Jerusalem that until Messiah the prince there are seven weeks and 62 weeks then the time of the return and the streets and the wall will be built. So this is dated probably if you if you go from say the epistle of Barnabas which is one of the earliest postapposic Christian documents it observes that this was I'm quoting the epistle of Barnabas uh this was fulfilled when the tabernacle was and the sanctuary were destroyed by the Romans in 70 AD. Uh Barnabas points out that the true temple remains to as the body of Christ the church the spiritual temple in which God truly dwells. 70 weeks is interpreted here to mean weeks of years. 490 years 70* 7 the prophecy applies to Jeremiah's 70 years in 9 to 2511 and uh 29:10. So this was we would say probably the call to rebuild the wall that we read about in Ezra in second uh Ezra 77. So if that occurs under after our desert sees commissions Ezra around 458 BC then for the Protestant interpretation to make sense you would have to have as many Protestant prophecy apologists or John Hegy type people do they think there's this pause between the last week until the end of the world >> but in our interpretation the Messiah is the one that's put to death in verse 26 >> there shall yet be no upright judment judgement for him. He will destroy the city and the sanctuary with the prince who is to come and they will be cut off with the flood. So that is either saying that Messiah the prince is the one who comes to destroy the temple which Jesus says he will do in Matthew 24 and Luke 21 talking about using the Roman legion providentially to come and destroy Jerusalem. That's why 70 AD is such a big deal >> because everything that Jesus predicted in Luke 21 and Matthew 24 happens in 70 AD, >> right? And Jesus even says to the apostles, "You standing here before me, you will see the temple raised to the ground." So all these passages for us are first advent. They're not second advent. Then it says, "Then he will confirm a covenant with many for one week. And in the middle of the week, sacrifice and offering will be taken away. And there will be in the temple of abominations of des abomination of desolation until the end of the time and to an end of the desolation appointed for us. The abomination happens in 70 AD when Titus Vespasian comes in, defiles the temple, >> puts up the Roman pagan banners and then raises the temple to the ground. He destroys it. That's the mirror reference to what happens with the Mcabes, right?

[00:07:12]With Antiochus Ephanes in the in the book of Mcabes. And it's >> going back even further when the Babylonians came in and destroyed the temple, they did the same thing. So there's three destructions of the temple. Babylonian Antiochus Epipanes under the Greeks and then the last abomination that Jesus references in the gospels is what happens in 70 AD. That's why the book of Hebrews we would say is describing this finality to the old covenant in the wrapping up the tearing down of the old administration of the temple and the Mosaic covenant. So all this stuff we would say is first advent.

[00:07:50]So when you read it in the Meseretic text, it's not necessarily saying that uh it's the that the that the Messiah is the antichrist. Does that make sense?

[00:08:02]I'll read it. I'll read it in the Maseretic. It says after three score and two weeks, Messiah will be cut off.

[00:08:07]That's him him dying.

[00:08:10]>> Uh but not for himself.

[00:08:11]>> The people of the prince shall come to destroy the city in the sanctuary. That could be a reference to Titus Vespasian or it could be saying that the same prince Messiah the prince will destroy the city and the sanctuary through the Roman legions which Jesus Jesus says this to the Pharisees. He says the kingdom of God will be taken to you and given to a nation producing the fruits thereof. You will see Jerusalem raised to the ground. And it's the same type of language if you read Ezekiel or Isaiah when they're prophesying against Israel and they say because you have disagreed, God will bring his chastisement through the pagan army that will come and destroy you. It's it's common prophetic language throughout Isaiah. Isaiah 19.

[00:08:52]Uh Ezekiel says the same type of stuff.

[00:08:55]>> Um Ezekiel Isaiah even says that God will come, you know, on a chariot and destroy Israel. Okay, God didn't literally come in a second coming to destroy, you know, Israel in the Babylonian captivity. He came in a judgment way through the invading armies as a chastisement. So it could either be that the Messiah in that reference is the same Messiah in pre in the previous sentence or the prince of the people being Titus Vespasian, the Roman prince who comes to destroy.

[00:09:26]>> Right. Okay. Yeah. Thank you for explaining your perspective on that. Do you hold to um uh partial predtoism or full predtoism?

[00:09:35]>> For us, full predtoism would be absolute heresy.

[00:09:37]>> And most of the Eastern church fathers who discuss or reference are all partial predtoists. Athanasius, uh epistle of Barnabas as an early example, uh serial of Alexandria, uh uh John Tristum where we are a partial predtoist.

[00:09:56]>> Okay. Gotcha. And um so so in in your guys's opinion, you know, when Jesus is saying in Matthew 24, for as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the the coming of the son of man at the second advent. So you guys do not believe that has happened yet.

[00:10:13]>> We believe that that there's an initial judgment on uh Israel that happens in 70 AD. That's a judgment in the sense of spiritual destruction of the temple and the nation and the people which was for us divine punishment. Jesus says in Matthew 23, all the things written of the prophets will come upon this generation. Right? So that happened in contemporary with him. But beyond that, no, we do also believe there's a fulfillment also at the end of the world. Which is why sometimes the church fathers or sometimes people say like the destruction of the temple is actually a prototype or a type of the destruction of the entire universe. So the temple because it's a little miniature model of the entire universe. Um it's being destroyed is a sign that this whole universe will eventually be destroyed in the conflration.

[00:11:05]And that's why Romans or excuse me, uh Paul in Hebrews connects the temple with this cosmos and this universe being destroyed. So in other words, its destruction is a foreshadowing of the destruction of the entire universe and cosmos at the end where there is a bodily resurrection, a second a bodily return of Christ, etc., etc. >> That is fascinating. I've never heard that before. Thanks for sharing that. So when I was listening to your um discussion with the misfit patriot, you you mentioned what sounded like an amalennial perspective saying that like the church itself is like the kingdom and that like the the like it's your it sounded like your interpretation was not that of like a literal thousand-y year reign of Christ, but that the church itself is the thousand-year reign of Christ. Was that >> Yeah, we would say anybody baptized is part of the first resurrection, right?

[00:11:56]So when you're baptized, when you're in the kingdom, you enter into the reign of Christ. That's why every time the New Testament cites Psalm 110 about the ascension, you know, sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your foottool. Every New Testament reference is not about the second coming. It's about the first the first advent and ascension. So Christ began his reign, which means that the church is his kingdom. Peter says right in 1 Peter 2, you are a nation of priests, a holy part, people set apart, a priesthood. So the church is the priesthood. It is the nation. Galatians uh Galatians 6 says, "Peace be upon those who are the Israel who are the church, the Israel of God."

[00:12:33]So the church is the Israel of God.

[00:12:35]Jesus says in Matthew 21 that the kingdom will be taken from the Jews and given to the a nation producing the fruits thereof. Speaking of the largely gentile church. Um so and Paul in Romans 9 through11 says that the Jews have been grafted out. The Gentiles have been grafted in but Jews can also still be grafted back in. So you see that it's not promises to the flesh state of Israel. Hence why Paul says in Galatians 4 that they are of the spiritually speaking of Hagar. Right? They're they're in slavery to the beggarly elements of the world. And we are born of our mother above the heavenly Jerusalem. So everybody baptized in the church according to Galatians 4 is part of the heavenly Jerusalem and the heavenly city which means that we are the true sons of Abraham and the sons of Sarah our mother. Our mother she's an image of the church. Does that make sense?

[00:13:28]>> Yeah. Yeah, it does. It does. Thank you for that. Um >> so >> so do you guys believe that there will be a literal physical return of Christ?

[00:13:38]>> Yeah, that's what I was saying a minute ago. There is a bodily second advent.

[00:13:42]Yes.

[00:13:42]>> Okay. Because that's confusing for me because when when I read what Paul writes in Thessalonians and he talks about at the second advent how we will be caught up to meet the Lord in the air.

[00:13:54]>> Uh I believe in other parts in scripture that says that that is simultaneous with the first resurrection specifically and that that's distinctly separate from the second res resurrection. So I'm getting cognitive dissonance there.

[00:14:07]>> No, no. So when I'm when I'm saying that like u if you are baptized you are part of the first resurrection ensuring that you're part of that entity at the end of time. So for us it's a both and I'm not trying to put a divide between those two.

[00:14:21]>> Um got we believe both.

[00:14:24]>> Okay. I thought you were saying that metaphorically like being baptized is the res. Okay.

[00:14:29]Gotcha. Thank you.

[00:14:30]>> No no there is a a second resurrection.

[00:14:32]And the book of Revelation says, right, that those who um what does it talk about? Those who are part of the first first resurrection uh and then those that are thrown into the lake of fire, right? That's that's at the end. We would say that's at the end of the great white throne judgment where yes, we are bodily resurrected, caught up into the clouds, you have the confflgration, and then you have the great white throne judgment.

[00:14:56]>> Okay. And so who so in Revelation 20 it talks about how um those who are beheaded during the tribulation will will rise during the first resurrection to reign with Christ for a thousand years. Like how who do you guys believe that's supposed to be?

[00:15:13]>> So uh in Revelation 20 I'll start with after the part about the bottomless pit.

[00:15:17]It says in verse four uh it says that uh after Satan was bound he must then be released for a little while. And then it says, 'I saw thrones and those that sat on them and judgment was committed to them. And I saw the souls of those been beheaded, the martyrs fore witness uh to Jesus and of the word of God who had not worshiped the beast or his image who had not received a mark on their foreheads or his hands and they lived and reigned with him for a thousand years. We believe that that is baptism and that you do enter into that because again remember the kingdom begins when Jesus sets it up. He says to Peter, I will give you the keys of the kingdom.

[00:15:50]Whatever you loose is loose. Whatever you bind is bind, right? Balance. So that same promise he gives to the other college of the apostles to bind and to loose and to be later on he says the princes of uh uh the new Israel. He says I will you will sit upon thrones judging the 12 tribes of Israel. Okay, we don't think that's all esqueological >> but we think that the esqueological is right now. So in other words, when you read revelation say 5-9, when John sees into heaven and he sees all this lurggical stuff of vestments and incense, we don't think that's esqueological only. We think that it's right now in the divine liturgy and it's esqueological. So at the esqueological in our view has invaded the right now and that began at the first advent. And if if you want the the term, it's called already not yet in a lot of the the theology. So we believe in an already not yet theology. So uh those who have part of the first resurrection are those who are baptized into Christ. They began to reign with him and they will continue to reign in the second advent at the resurrection.

[00:17:02]>> Okay. Gotcha.

[00:17:03]>> That's why we believe in communion of saints that that the saints right now are reigning with Christ.

[00:17:07]>> Gotcha. Gotcha. Okay. Okay. So, um I have another question about this subject too because I I approach and and I have approached a lot of this esqueological stuff from uh a historical premillennialist perspective. Um I'm like over the past several years as I've learned more and more about the postmillennialist and nonmillennialist perspectives, I've been like humbled by obviously just h how much debate there's been on all of this throughout history.

[00:17:37]And it's like there's just so much to learn now when I look at like the the events that are unfolding around us especially in the Middle East. Um and then also the technological advancement that's rushing forward to me like that strengthens my view of historical premillennialism.

[00:17:56]Like I just I see an intersection between all of these things. But I'm also I'm open to the possibility that that interpretation could be wrong because you know >> well again so if you look up Psalm 110 and every time and and era when it's cited in the New Testament it's always cited about the ascension and the ascension happens the beginning of the book of acts right another way to see this is so in other words that means that when he ascended he sat at the right hand and he began to rule and to make his enemies his foot his >> foottool Okay. So if we look at Daniel 7 and when we see in Daniel 7 the one who ascends in the clouds and then he approaches the ancient of days and to him is given power and authority and dominion over all the nations.

[00:18:43]>> Yes, >> we believe that's the ascension as well.

[00:18:45]So when you read at the beginning of the apocalypse when John sees into heaven and he sees the Messiah, the lamb being given authority, dominion, and power, that's the same thing Daniel was talking about. Daniel 7. And that's what happened. That's what happened at the ascension in Acts one. And another way to prove this is if you look at Joel uh 2 and three when Joel predicts the uh Pentecost where the Holy Spirit is poured out upon all flesh.

[00:19:13]That's fulfilled not at the end of the world even though it says on the last days I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh. When you read Acts two they interpret that. Peter interprets that as the events at Pentecost. You see? So there could be an esqueological pouring out of the Holy Spirit that is an ultimate fulfillment. But the but the important fulfillment for us that we look at is Acts 2 Pentecost. So that's the last days. So when Jesus talks about the last days, when Paul talks about the last days, it's not always talking about the end of the world. In that case, the last days began when the kingdom of the Messiah was set up, which is his church, which is at the first advent.

[00:19:56]Okay. Gotcha. So, are are you approaching all this from would it be fair to call it the amillennialist perspective?

[00:20:02]>> Um, I I I tend to favor post I tend to favor postmillennialism.

[00:20:09]>> Postmillennialism. Okay. And is is there anything that's like kind of standard within orthodoxy in terms of like is there like a standard esquetology that >> um I would say probably the majority of the church fathers who who even comment on it would just be all millennial. Um, but in the Orthodox church, there's not a lot of discussion about any specifics of the end times because of the fact that we think that when the times are near, that the church will have discernment about who the antichrist is and what's going on. There are uh kind of general outlines of we think there will be uh a new temple uh a Jewish temple. We think that there will be, you know, attempts to persecute the church and shut it down. there will be a mass apostasy in the church. Um the conversion of the Jews is another major sign uh that the Orthodox church fathers have all talked about as a sign of the end. So there's sort of general ideas about what types of things would be there as signs of the end of the world.

[00:21:07]Um but there's not any set position on whether there will be a uh for example a lot of passages like Psalm 72 talk about a mass uh converting of the world to the extent that to the extent that as the prophets say the knowledge of God will be all all over the world as as the as the waters cover the sea. And so there's a possibility, right, that that could happen gradually or um if Romans 11 is is predicting the conversion of the Jews, then the Jews, Paul says, will convert the world like that whenever they convert in mass. So that could happen quick. That could happen over a long span of time. Um but there's really not like a specific like you have to be a pessimistic all millennialist or you have to be a you know optimistic postmillennialist, >> right? Basically, basically what's forbidden at the second ecumenical council is any kind of killism or earthly thousand-year millennium. So, when the the creed says whose kingdom shall have no end, which was confirmed at the second ecumenical council, that for us excludes any literal uh literalist millennial reign.

[00:22:19]>> And you said you you said second council which which council is this? So after Nika right which is 325 where they confirm the deed of Christ and they come up with kind of a loose outline nine creed the next ecumenical council is called Constantinople one and it's unique because it's the official trinitarian council right so the majority of that council is deal is dealing with the trinity after the christoologgical council of na and um the capidosian church fathers are the key figures at that and they revise and add a little bit to the creed >> the added part uh which which which is why it's called the nino constant creed states whose kingdom shall have no end and that was intended to exclude uh the opinion that some Christians had of a literal kilastic millennium.

[00:23:10]>> Okay. Okay. Thank you for explaining that. That's a lot to wrap my mind around. Um so to go back to what we were talking about >> could I recommend a good book?

[00:23:21]Are you are you asking if you can >> to you?

[00:23:24]>> Yeah, please. Yeah, go for it.

[00:23:26]>> Uh well, there's a couple. I would recommend um Days of Vengeance by David Chilton and I would recommend um Paradise Restored by David Chilton and Before Jerusalem Fell by Dr. Ken Gentry.

[00:23:41]Those are good books.

[00:23:44]>> Paradise. I'm just writing these down.

[00:23:46]>> And Chilton wrote Days of Vengeance, right? like he was almost becoming Orthodox and then he passed away right before becoming Orthodox. So he was but he was about to be Orthodox.

[00:23:55]>> What was that third one after Paradise Restored?

[00:23:57]>> Uh Dr. Ken Gentry's book Before Jerusalem Fell.

[00:24:03]>> Okay.

[00:24:05]Um yeah, thanks for those. I I'll check those out. Um, so what what you were describing a second ago on like sort of the general Orthodox position on for example the conversion of the Jews, the possibility of another temple, so on and so forth.

[00:24:19]It it it almost sounds like like if I'm understanding it correctly, it almost sounds like the general position might be that the events of 70 AD may have been like a typological >> No, that's exactly what I'm saying.

[00:24:32]They're a type of the end. Yeah.

[00:24:34]>> So there So it's not the end. It's a it's a type of the actual end.

[00:24:38]>> Correct.

[00:24:40]>> Okay.

[00:24:42]>> Hence why I was saying that the temple which according to Paul and a lot of theologians across various traditions the temple is like a little miniature universe. It symbolizes the heavens.

[00:24:53]>> So for example if you read if you read Hebrews 7 when it talks about the high priest going into the holy of holies.

[00:25:00]Paul says that that was fulfilled when Jesus ascended into heaven to the holy of holies, God's throne. Right.

[00:25:08]>> Right.

[00:25:08]>> So, the ascension is the fulfillment of the day of atonement.

[00:25:13]And that tells us that when you walk into the temple in the outer and you have the holy of holies and then you have the temple proper. When you walk in there, you have the lampstand which is supposed to symbolize the stellar phenomena. So, you're in space. Outside is the world earth. Inside is the spatial terrestrial heavens. And then the holy of holies is God's throne, the third heavens according to Paul. So the temple is a miniature of the universe.

[00:25:41]And when it was destroyed, that was a sign that this universe, as Paul says, will be rolled up like a scroll.

[00:25:50]>> That's like mind-blowing.

[00:25:52]That's so that's so mind-blowing to think about.

[00:25:55]>> Yeah. Yeah, I mean Hebrews 7 is like super deep. It's it's really wild.

[00:26:00]>> Yeah, dude, you're giving me so much to chew on. Um, okay. So the the part of the reason why I ask that question is because for me when it comes to the esqueological timeline, I mean like the to me it seems evident that like obviously the Jews are trying to build their third temple right now and that that third temple would have based on what scripture says an intimate tie to the antichrist and the fulfillment of the prophecies of the final days. Um I also I I I started reading um a while back Dr. Taylor Marshall's book uh Antichrist and Apocalypse to try and understand more about like how the Catholics viewed all of this stuff and I don't know if Taylor Marshall's view is typical of Catholics or not but he had one chapter um on uh the subject of a third temple and in that chapter he mentioned that um Urenaeus Hippolitus I might have butchered that guy's name Hippolytus Cyro of Jerusalem Hillary of Poier uh St. Ambrose St. Jerome, St. Chrysum and then St. John of Damascus that um basically all of them believed that there would be like a future third temple that that's what I was saying like that's why I was saying one of the signs amongst the Orthodox church fathers, saints, elders is that if there is a new third temple that is built >> then that's one of the signs that it it's the end of the world.

[00:27:26]>> Okay.

[00:27:27]Okay. Interesting. the the other signs being the mass apostasy of the Christian church uh the attempt to shut down in our view the liturgy uh globally um the conversion of the Jews uh and then the man of sin >> right on on a personal level I know you spend a lot of time uh studying all the nefarious plans of our global elites and stuff on a personal level like do you see an intersection between all this transhumanism stuff and these prophecies?

[00:27:56]>> Um it could be. I I I don't know. Um we're I think as Orthodox, we're very hesitant to to do the I'm not faulting you, but a lot of evangelicals kind of hop on that like sensationalist u approach to, you know, headline is Jesus where they see a headline and they read it into the book of scripture. You know, we don't really do that. We we're very measured and guarded about doing that to avoid what we call pre-list. But it certainly is possible.

[00:28:23]>> Okay. Yes. I mean, that's a very politically correct answer, but like when you look at like them >> No, I'm trying to be politically corre correct. I'm honestly telling you like what what >> I don't know. And I I don't I know you're giving a fair representation of the like the orthodox position on this, but I like I'm asking you like me personally, Jire.

[00:28:43]>> I I don't know. I really don't just because there's so many passages that I think back up a positive assessment of um the continued spread of Christianity um of the victory of orthodoxy um that I'm not I'm just I don't know if I don't know I'll just I'm I'm not beyond just saying I don't know.

[00:29:08]>> Right. Right. Right. Yeah. I just to me it's like like I look at the the um the description offered in Revelation chapter 13 verses 16-18 and it's like oh okay like it sounds like it may be describing some sort of implant on our bodies that we need uh in order to access the global economic system and like when I just >> yeah well I mean yeah I understand that could be what they go for um something like that and I think that at the least what they were pushing in the last few years was a beast system but whether it's the final version of that I don't know and you one thing that you might find interesting is uh you don't have this in the Protestant Bible but if you get an Orthodox study Bible there's a an extra canonical book called third Mcabes and it's just further kind of exploits uh past first and second Mcabes and it describes the sort of satan anic moves that the uh ruler Tomley tried to do and he attempts to institute a mark for all of the faithful to not be able to buy or to sell unless they have this mark. And it's said to be a mark of the mysteries of Dionius. If you read the the text, it's pretty fascinating in Second Mcabes. I think it's second Macabes 1 23 somewhere in there. But I bring it up because it shows that this same spirit which we would say Tolley was trying to engage in then we interpret Revelation 13 as what Nero tried to do. So we think the beast of Revelation is Nero in the immediate context, >> right?

[00:30:50]>> And then at the end of the world that will probably also return in some form.

[00:30:57]>> Okay. Okay. Yeah, I'm pretty aligned with that. Um, and I heard you. So, I shifting gears completely. I don't know.

[00:31:05]Do you have Do you mind if I ask you a couple more questions because >> uh No, just uh I am on YouTube, so if you don't mind, keep it a little bit, you know, safe for YouTube.

[00:31:14]>> Yes. Okay. All right. So, uh, with that in mind, um, I heard you starting to briefly get into the Rothschild stuff with Misfit Patriot, and he immediately just scoffed at it. He was like, "The Rothschild." I mean, there's videos of Lord Rothchild on YouTube talking about how proud he is of his family's ability to get the Balffor Declaration through.

[00:31:35]>> Yeah, it's like that's >> He has a copy of it that he's proud of.

[00:31:38]So, >> yeah, that's that's not conspiracy theory at all. It's that's like publicly documented. One of the things that I'm I'm interested though in is um you started to allude to the rise of dispensationalism in America >> uh during that time period. And I've heard that uh Cyrus Scoffield in in my readings from what I can tell Cyrus Scoffield he connected with Samuel Untermire at the Lotus Club. Yes. In New York and then Unterm funded the creation of his Bible with the Oxford University Press. Exactly.

[00:32:08]>> And I I've read that Undermeer was like a lawyer who worked with or for the Rothschilds. I haven't been able to find any solid information on that. Uh, I don't know if that's the case, but I do know that Samuel Anttomire was a famous patron um of I think there's like a giant uh park in New York uh named after him, but he was a very famous Zionist.

[00:32:30]So it's definitely I think it's pretty obvious that the promotion of dispensationalism in America was for the purpose of getting American Christianity across the board to support what the British Empire wanted to do in the Middle East through the the the mandate and the establishment of the nation state of Israel.

[00:32:48]>> Yeah. I mean that's that's what it seems like to me like when I look at the the broad arc of history there. It just kind of seems like all of the groundwork was laid, you know, almost 50 year 40 or 50 years in advance prior to the establishment of the state of Israel for dispensational theology that would basically trick Christians into believing that the nation state of Israel is the is the real Israel as opposed to God's church being the true Israel.

[00:33:15]>> Absolutely.

[00:33:15]>> Yeah. And like it's like the to me it's like the craziest bait and switch in like the history of Christendom in terms of like just >> Yeah. But I mean >> Yeah. You heard the guy on here earlier.

[00:33:27]That's who that's directed at. Goober's like that guy.

[00:33:31]>> Yeah. 100%. And I'm like I like it it it you know it blew my mind when I started to unravel it several years ago. I was like, "Holy crap." like the the I I had never even heard that before as an American Protestant that the nation state of Israel might not actually be the true the true Israel of the Bible in the New Testament as described by the saints until I got on Twitter and heard people start to unravel that myth. Um, but to me like it just it it looks like it looks like a coordinated conspiracy 50 years in advance prior to the nation the establishment of the nation state of Israel to lay like heretical theological foundations to sigh up, you know, a 100 million American Christians into that's just geopolitics. It's not even like a conspiracy theory. I think that's just kind of obvious, you know. I mean, geopolitical stuff still works this way with the funding of a lot of these evangelical groups like John Hegy to push all the same stuff. And you and you'll notice like I mean like I was an evangelical Zionist in like 1998, right?

[00:34:35]When I first started reading the Bible and I bought a John HGY prophecy study Bible, so I was, you know, wrapped up in this stuff. I still have my Scoffield Bible up there on the shelf. Um, but the way I came out of it was first of all through covenant theology and I was anomalist for a while. Like I read a lot of millennial stuff and that got me thinking, okay, this is not like all this premillennial dispensational stuff is not true. It's it's way out out there wacky. But then when I learned about, you know, think tanks and how they push things and NOS's and the push, for example, by a lot of these groups to say that uh China and Russia are Gog and Magog, right? That's a big thing they always push.

[00:35:14]>> Well, they're pushing that because the the lobbies push that on purpose. That's part of their geopolitical structure.

[00:35:20]And if you've watched enough of these evangelical prophecy clowns for 20, 30 years, like it's always the same script that they run.

[00:35:29]>> Yeah. Yeah. Totally. I mean, it ju it just kind of seems to me like there's been like And I I don't know how much like I don't know where the real world conspiracy like like the how can I put this? I don't know where the temporal conspiracy ends and like the spiritual conspiracy begins because my my opinion on a lot of what's happening in terms of current events is that Satan's kind of like a chess player who's like trying to move all of his pawns on the chessboard. His pawns being, you know, people who have their allegiance to him wittingly or not. And he's trying to like move all of his pawns to basically like like raise the antichrist. And it like Christian Zionism to me, I'm curious what you think of this. Christian Zionism to me seems like a scop literally for the purpose of creating the modern nation state of Israel. Creating support for the modern nation state of Israel in the form of you know financial funding and ideological religious support that would eventually culminate in the creation of a third temple and the raising of the antichrist. Like that's that's what all of this looks like to me. And all it's it's really interesting too because you have this idea of the pre-tribulational rapture that's tied into it. So, you have all of these Protestant Christians that believe that, oh, we're like, we should support Israel and like their Antichrist goals, even though they don't realize that they're trying to raise the Antichrist in my opinion. Like, we should support Israel and their Antichrist goals and we're just going to get raptured as soon as the tribulation begins. Like, does that at all seem like an accurate read to you? Because that to me, like that's just >> Well, yeah. Again, I don't know exactly if it is the end of the world, but um I mean, I think that like even even Israelis like laugh and make fun of the evangelicals as idiots. Like I don't know if you've seen those videos where they talk about like how stupid the American evangelicals are for >> Yeah.

[00:37:17]>> like supporting like wholesale whatever.

[00:37:20]Um and you know, John HGY has received a bunch of that kind of money to push that stuff. So, but uh I don't know about I mean again it's just it has nothing to do with that stuff. is just that for me like the passages that talk about optimistic esquetology are what make me hesitant to say oh antichrist is coming and you know I already had all that kind of I'm not dissing you but like I had that whole you know end times prophecy type phase of stuff when I was young evangelical guy so u I got into all mill covenant theology postmillennial stuff back in like 200 two three so I was pretty much done with that stuff um but anyway I'm going to I'm going to close it up just because I'm getting super tired, but I want to thank you for coming on, man. Anything else you want to leave us with?

[00:38:05]>> Um, no. Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions. That was a very entertaining debate, and if you if you felt called to it at any point, I think it'd be super fruitful to discuss someone who, unlike the misfit patriot, is actually serious about their theological position for Christian Zionism. I think I think that'd be really edifying to listen to. Yeah, I think it'd be difficult to find one, but I think uh Andrew was trying to say he would like to find one, but we'll have to see.