[Coming soon. It's a 2 hour video, and I intend to make thorough notes on debunking every claim Steve Anderson made in this video in his butchering of Scripture to prove his view of a post tribulation, pre-wrath rapture ( while he claims to be a fundamental Baptist). This article is still in the process of new additions but I am publishing certain portions as I finish each section to give readers a head start on studying these issues in advance of the completed article.
There is also as section at the bottom on other warnings about Steven Anderson's teachings. I will soon be adding to that as I have watched videos this week where he attempts to debunk dispensationalism, and another video where upholds the Pentacostal "oneness" doctrine of the Trinity. While I have disagreements about his views on dispensationalism, the rapture, his attitude toward government, his praying for the death of the president, this last issue on the oneness doctrine is what any of his followers should be leary of as I would classify his church as a cult on that basis alone.]
A few of the upcoming issues I will touch on I will mention now.
There are many duplicates of this video on the internet, so the reference I will be using when quoting timelines of statements taken from the documentary will be taken from THIS VIDEO and the timelines will be in quotes (for example “(1:10:15)” would indicate the statement is found at the first hour and ten minute mark of the video.
Steve Claims He Learned His Views By Studying The Bible Alone
At the end of Steve’s documentary, he credits his revelation of this understanding of the rapture “myth” to a study of Matthew 24 when he was 12 years old. (1:40:00). He thanks Jesus that he learned this after all the brainwashing of scholars and Scofield. I must say that must be traumatic for a 12-year-old to undergo such brainwashing of so many scholars and C.I. Scofield. His entire documentary centers around his understanding of “after the tribulation of those days” implying that the rapture of the church occurs after the tribulation. While he claims that no pre-tribber can point to the word “rapture” in Revelation prior to the tribulation, neither can he point the word rapture in Matthew 24 to prove that this passage proves that the rapture of the church occurs after the tribulation.
Nevertheless, despite Steve’s claim that he learned this on his own, it is ironic that the passage he cites is the exact same passage that inspired Roger Van Kampen and Marvin Rosenthal to write a book about a pre-wrath rapture titled “Rapture Questions Answered” where the same explanation for this pre-wrath rapture position taken by Steve is also found on pages 48-49 of Van Kampen’s book. Steve Anderson’s video is not a new theory or attempted refutation of the pre-tribulation rapture, it is merely a rehashed version of the works of Rosenthal and Van Kampen’s books on the pre-wrath rapture.
Steve’s Misconception of the Wrath of God and the Purpose of the Tribulation
Steve claims that the wrath of God is not the same as the great tribulation and is therefore a separate event. He also seems to confuse tribulation in general, with tribulation as a judgment.
The Tribulation As Separate From Wrath
John shows clearly that the wrath of God as called the wrath of God is based on the judgments and all of the judgments have their start from the book that the Lamb is only worthy to open in Rev 5:5. Thus to say that the tribulation is not the wrath of God fails to notice Who opens the book for all the judgments to take place. Furthermore, Steve fails to separate the wrath of God from the GREAT DAY of His wrath. It is clear that events become progressively worse during the tribulation, which culminates in the event known as the great DAY of His wrath in Rev 6:17. (See also Rev 16:14 where 3 unclean spirits come out of the mouth of the dragon, the beast, and false prophet to “gather them to the battle of that GREAT DAY of God Almighty”)
This event is not descriptive of a one time event that is immediately preceded by the rapture as Steve claims, it is a term used to describe the finality of God’s judgment.
The Purpose of the Tribulation
The purpose of the tribulation is ignored entirely by Steve. Knowing the purpose of the tribulation is important to understand why the church will not be present. Steve offers several verses to “prove” that Christians suffer tribulation. An associate of the film, pastor Jiminez, quotes Acts 14:22 where Paul says we must “through much tribulation enter the kingdom of God” as proof that Christians are not immune from tribulation. However, this ignores the difference between Christians that have suffered general persecution as a result of their beliefs, from tribulation designed to be a judgment on unbelievers. If all the verses cited by Jiminez and Anderson are evidence of the church going through the tribulation, then the church has been in the tribulation for 1800 years under the Dark Ages of Rome, but we are talking about a specific event that lasts 7 years. Therefore there must be a clear difference between tribulation in general and the judgments of Revelation, and since Paul made that statement 2000 years before the events of Revelation have even begun and was beheaded before AD 100, clearly Acts 14:22 is not a reference to the church going through the tribulation.
The purpose of the tribulation is described in Daniel 9:25-27, commonly called “Daniel’s 70th Week”. The relevant portion of that passage that shows this period is in reference to Israel is that part of those last 7 weeks (7 years) were for Israel to “finish the transgression” and “make an end of sins”. To claim that Christians are part of this is to lump the church in with finishing a 490 year period of judgment that started with Israel and was postponed when Christ was crucified. Why would the church be required to finish Israel’s transgression?
Daniel also states the last 7 weeks are where God will make an end of sins to the nation of Israel. If Christians are part of the tribulation, that implies that where the Bible says that we have NOW received the atonement is ineffective. Romans 5:11. Believers are also sealed the moment they believe. Eph 1:13. Now to his credit, Steve does espouse to eternal security, but that doctrine is of no consequence if it is held that the church will be made to “make an end of sins” under God’s judgment. The church’s sins are nailed to the cross right now. Col 2:13-14.
Moreover, Jesus states the purpose of the tribulation in Rev 3:10
“Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation that shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth“
Not only is this verse not addressed by Steve at all in this documentary, but the purpose of the tribulation is clearly stated to “try those who dwell upon the earth”. Since when in the epistles to the church is a believer tried under a judgment of God? Peter mentions that “the trial of your faith worketh patience”, and Paul says “there hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man”, but in both instances, there is a difference between testing of one’s faith and testing ones faith under judgments of God that were intended to try ALL THE WORLD. It is absurd to claim that God tests the Christian at the same time and under the same judgments as the rest of the world.
Scripture is certainly clear that Christians suffer tribulation at the hands of unbelievers. But the Bible NEVER says that the Christian suffers THE tribulation. Steve claims that tribulation is “what the world does to us” (37:25) but as shown above, this defies the plain teaching of the Bible that separates tribulation as a common form of persecution that has occurred over the last 2000 years, and THE tribulation as a specific event directed toward Israel in Daniel 9 and the unbelieving world that has rejected Christ.
There is therefore NOW no condemnation for those in Christ Jesus. It is hard to reconcile the promise of Rom 8:1 with the judgments of the tribulation. Furthermore, Jesus told his believers to pray, “lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil”, so even Jesus did not expect his followers to be part of a judgment meant for unbelievers since He specifically told them to pray for deliverance from evil.
Who Are The Elect?
Steve claims that the elect are both Jews as well as the church, it is merely a term for anyone who is saved but that now the emphasis is on the church, and the church has inherited all of the covenants and replaced Israel (“replacement theology”). As a proof text, Steve cites Romans 11:7 which states “What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for, but the election hath obtained it AND THE REST WERE BLINDED” (emphasis added). Steve rationalizes that how could the elect be Israel if Rom 11:7 shows a difference between the elect and Israel?
First, the term “elect” is not an all-inclusive term that means the same thing at every time and every place in the Bible. Elect must be defined by its context. The question must be asked, is it possible to have an elect within an elect? YES. In 1 Kings 19:18, God told Elijah that He reserved to Himself 7,000 men who have not bowed to Baal. Thus God used an elected group within the same group (Paul even uses this example in Rom 11). This same illustration is also used in the story of Gideon where God chose the men who did not lap the water like dogs. Judges 7:5. Steve fails to see that in the context of Romans 11:7, Paul uses an OT passage where God used an elect group of JEWS from a group OF JEWS.
What Steve also fails to notice is the END of Rom 11:7 where it says “..but the election hath obtained it and the rest were blinded”. The rest of who?? Whoever “the rest” were that were blinded come from the same group. Was it the rest of the church that were blinded? No. In just a few short verses in Rom 11:25-26 it says that Israel was under blindness. Therefore the remnant or elect of Romans 11:7 are the elect OF ISRAEL that will be set apart during the tribulation. This is made abundantly clear in vs 15, and 28 where in verse 15, the nation is given “life from the dead” and in verse 28 Paul writes:
As concerning the GOSPEL they are enemies for your sakes, but as touching the ELECTION they are beloved for the father’s sake” Romans 11:28
Notice the clear distinction between those “concerning the GOSPEL” and those “touching the election”. The gospel is referring to the church in this present time. Rom 2:16, Rom 15:16, Rom 16:25, I Cor 4:15. And Paul’s gospel is distinguished as the “gospel of the uncircumcision” Gal 2:7. Romans 11 is to the elect of Israel. Nothing could be more clear to show that there is a unique distinction between the church of the gospel and the elect of Israel. If those of the pre-wrath position insist that the elect of Romans 11 is the church, than to whom are those “concerning the GOSPEL”?
The entire context of Romans 11 begins in chapter 9, where Paul makes it clear that the people he is referring to our his brethren according to the flesh. Rom 9:3. These elect are physical. literal Jews and are found in Revelation 7:4-8, and Revelation 14:3-4. In fact, Paul writes a letter specifically to HEBREWS that contain instructions specifically to Jews during the tribulation.
The Elect of Matthew 24:31
Steve cites Matt 24:31 to show that the elect are the church raptured “after the tribulation of those days”. Matthew 24:31 reads;
And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds from one end of heaven to the other”
The first issue is whether this passage applies to “all” or specifically to the Jews. Steve claims that when Jesus says “and what I say unto you, I say to ALL” as evidence that this passage refers to all believers. The term all is often limited to specific audiences, and doesn’t always included everyone. Paul said that grace of God hath appeared unto all men in Titus, yet that would be impossible given the limited locations that the gospel had not been sent to yet at that time. Thus when Jesus says “what I say to you I say to ALL” is a reference to those not only available at that time, but also to all within the context of who He is referring to. It is quite odd to hear one who claims to be a fundamental Baptist use a Calvinistic and Universalistic usage of the world “all”.
Secondly, although this can be a technical semantic, it is worth further study. Matthew 24:31 does not say that this elect group is gathered FROM EARTH, it says from the four winds of HEAVEN. And in Revelation when Jesus comes back “after the tribulation of those days” when Steve says He comes back, ch 19 shows Him coming WITH his church. Of course this is not a new argument, but one that Steve ignores when he attempts to claim that Christ gathers His elect in the process of coming back to earth while ignoring that the church is already with Him in the air.
And, something that seems to have escaped the eye of most commentators is in Rev 19:6-8 when referring the the marriage and the supper, that “his WIFE hath made herself ready”. It did not say His betrothed or his fiance, but His WIFE hath made herself ready. She is already married before the event begins. Considering that in Jewish Biblical custom that a bethrothed woman was considered a wife minus the ceremony that made it offical. Notice that in Matthew 1:19-23, Mary is said to be ESPOUSED to Joseph, but when he thinks she committed adultery because she was pregnant, an angel said to Joseph not to fear taking Mary they WIFE. They had not had the ceremony but were still considered husband and wife. Therefore betrothal period of the Lamb’s wife occurred PRIOR to the “wrath” and the marriage ceremony and the supper.
Thirdly, the manner of the calling of the elect is different from that which is described of the church in 1 Thess 4:16, and 1 Cor 15:51-52. In Matt 24:31, it is (a) the angels gathering the elect and (b) the angels give the sound of a trumpet.
Now notice is 1 Thess it is the Lord Himself that calls the church up to heaven, not the angels gathering the church. There is no mention of the Lord Himself giving a shout in Matthew 24 as it states in 1 Thess 4:16, and given Steve’s habit of making arguments from silence, the failure of Matthew 24:31 to mention the shout of the Lord, and the voice of the archangel (instead of angels) must mean that the gathering of the elect here is not the rapture of the church.
Forth, the trumpet events are not the same as those found in 1 Thess 4 and 1 Cor 15. The trumpet that follows the tribulation is the voice of the seventh angel in Rev 10:7 “But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared unto his servants the prophets” And this seventh angel is the last of six other angels with him which shows that all 7 angels are of the same rank. However, the voice described relevant to 1 Thess 4:16 is the voice of the ARCH angel. No other prophecy in Matt 24, Luke 17, Luke 21, Mark 13, Rev 10:7 mentions an arch angel’s voice being used to call out the church. This is found ONLY in 1 Thess 4:16 and the events are distinctly different from the gathering described in Matthew 24. (I will explain later the different stages of rapture in 1 Thess 4:16 that are all included in one verse, something overlooked by even pre-tribbers).
And finally, was Matthew 24 to the Jews or to “all” as Steve claims. Jesus stated in Matthew 15:24 that ” I am not sent but to the lost sheep of Israel”. Further on Jesus tells a woman that “it is not meet to take the children’s (Israel’s) bread and give it to the dogs (Gentiles)”. In Matthew 23:37, Jesus weeps over Jerusalem for their rejection of Him which clearly shows in both above passages that Jesus primary concern upon His arrival was with the house of Israel.
Furthermore, all of Matthew 24 is in response to a JEWISH QUESTION asked at the beginning of the chapter based upon events that Jews were familiar with from the Old Testament. Pre Tribbers point to the mention of the sabbath as evidence that this is related to Jews, and for good reason. Steve simple argues that Jesus mentioned the sabbath because it would be difficult to travel on the sabbath, but he fails to mention why the sabbath is mentioned at all considering that the church for 2000 years, beginning in Acts, met on the first day of the week instead of the sabbath. Acts 20:7, I Cor 16:2. Why mention the sabbath at all if the audience was intended to include Gentiles? To force this passage to include Gentiles would mean that a Gentile Christian would be required to some how travel to Israel to join the Jews in fleeing to the mountains.
Even after Christ’s ascension, the apostles preached to none but the Jews. It was not until Acts 10 when God told Peter to preach to Cornelius that a Gentile heard the gospel, ten years after Christ went to heaven. Paul did not cease dealing with the Jews altogether until Acts 28 which he promised to do in Acts 18:6. Thus even several years AFTER Christ’s ascension, the focus was still on the Jew first (Rom 1:16), and as the transition period progressed during the initial church phases, Paul eventually became the exclusive apostles to the Gentiles (Gal 2:7-8). The doctrine’s that effect the New Testament church were not developed until Paul was imprisoned in Rome and began writing his epistles.
This does not mean that previous Scriptures are not of any matter to the church. Paul states in Romans 15:4 that whatsoever things that were written afore time were written for our learning (not DOCTRINE) that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope. But rightly dividing the word of truth means putting the Scriptures in their proper context.
Therefore any reader can reasonably conclude that Matthew 24 was in fact directed at Jewish believers at that time, and Jewish prospects that will be present during the tribulation.
Steve Claims We Fear Persecution.
Steve’s “show stopper” seems to be that Christians want to believe in a pre-trib rapture because they/we fear persecution. First, I personally have seen more bloodshed in war than Steve will ever see from getting his head bashed in on a car door because he was defiant of authorities in violation of Romans 13. There are missionaries all over the world who preach in atheist and Islamic countries that know at any moment their life could be taken because of what they believe who adhere to a pre-tribulation rapture.
There was even a famous story long ago in a movie based on the life of David Wilkerson, “Cross and the Switchblade” who was nearly fatally stabbed as a result of his preaching to street gangs in America. Therefore to make this claim is an unfounded speculative accusation that defies the evidence among the testimony of missionaries, and even soul-winners in this country who have witnessed in gang and drug infested neighborhoods and been shot, stabbed, beaten and killed for their witness. There are numerous stories from all over the world, particularly in Muslim countries, of Christians who have been imprisoned, tortured and murdered for their faith in Christ, many of whom were independent fundamental Baptists who believed in a pre-tribulation rapture.
Steve Quotes Revelation 13:7 As Evidence.
Steve relies on Revelation 13:7 to prove that the church will undergo the same judgment as the unbelievers that the tribulation was intended for which reads “and it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them”. And thus he claims “aha! there it is”. But if you read Revelation 12:17, it clarifies who Satan is going after, where also Steve neglects to notice a group of believers who are protected from the tribulation (Rev 12:5, 14)
And the dragon was wroth with the woman (Israel, read vs 12:1 to prove that) and went to make war with the remnant of her SEED” Rev 12:17
The church is NEVER referred to as the SEED of Israel. Seed is used to describe a literal, physical, bloodline JEW. Therefore the “saints” that the beast is pursuing in Rev 13:7 are the remnant of believing JEWS from Revelation 12:17.
Steve quotes Galations 3:29 to show that we are Abraham’s seed (although he does not tie in Rev 13:7 with this passage). However, Galations is not referring to believers being of the literal seed of Abraham, but a seed that is comparable to believers because of faith in Christ. There is a clear difference between the spiritual application of the seed in Galations, and the literal physical seed of Israel that is the subject of Revelation 13:7 .
Those in Revelation “keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ” Rev 14:12, and sing the song of Moses in Rev 15:3. Nowhere in the epistles to the church are believers told to “keep the COMMANDMENTS of God”, but this is a requirement of the Jews during the tribulation. Hence any Gentile that is saved during the tribulation is saved by the preaching of Christ through JEWISH ministers, because the ministry of the church is absent (as will be seen below in a discussion on Rev 14:6).
Steve Argues The Rapture Was Not Taught Before 1830
Again, as stated in our opening, this is evidence that Steve did not just learn this doctrine on his own. This lie is an oft-repeated cliché by preterists, historicists and all anti-pre-trib rapture opponents.
The scripture is enough. It is not necessary to find any historical “father” to support a doctrinal position and would be irrelevant if the doctrine was discovered 1800 years later, but history does show that that is not the case. In fact, there is nobody that argued that the rapture was not taught until 1800s until Dave McPherson popularized this accusation in 70s. It is ironic that Steve and his associate claim that pre-tribbers get their doctrines from extra-Biblical sources, but then rely on extra-Biblical arguments to prove that there was no mention of the rapture being taught prior to the 1800s.
Recent discoveries of the Dead Sea Scrolls have documents as far as AD 70 that read, “The Rapture will occur suddenly. And countless thousands will vanish from the earth. Swept up to heaven to live with Jesus and escape the torment of the Tribulation, the others will be left behind.”
Ephraim the Syrian writing in AD 373 stated that:
Why therefore do we not reject every care of earthly actions and prepare ourselves for the meeting of the Lord Christ, so that he may draw us from the confusion, which overwhelms all the world? Believe you me, dearest brother, because the coming (advent) of the Lord is nigh, believe you me, because the end of the world is at hand, believe me, because it is the very last time. Or do you not believe unless you see with your eyes? See to it that this sentence be not fulfilled among you of the prophet who declares: “Woe to those who desire to see the day of the Lord!” For all the saints and elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins
There is debate over the dating of Ephrem the Syrian, some argue that it was not written until the AD 500 circa. This argument is irrelevant, the debate is whether or not a rapture was taught before the tribulation prior to the 1800s as Steve claims, and even if Ephrem the Syrian’s writing was not published until AD 500, it is still over 1000 years before Darby in the 1800s or C.I. Scofield from 1843-1921.
There are at least 20 other citations of believers I can give that taught a pre-trib rapture prior to the 1800s, thus the assumption that Steve has merely repeated from others that the rapture was never taught prior to the 1800s is erroneous, and the evidence clearly pre-dates John Darby and C.I. Scofield.
What is ironic about this accusation is that Steve Anderson is quick to admonish believers to shun men’s doctrine who have demonstrated heretical and immoral practices (such as Jack Schaap, former pastor of First Baptist Church of Hammond) and rightly so. That is certainly scriptural, but a large portion of his documentary is based on an interview that he has with Dr Kent Hovind FROM PRISON who was convicted on 58 counts of violating federal laws regarding taxes, obstruction of justice, and 45 counts of structuring cash transactions, and Hovind (who earned his doctorate degrees in a 6 week course taught out of a mobile home trailer) proudly supports the heretic, Ray Comfort. Thus Steve Anderson is quite inconsistent on who he is willing to obtain his information from.
Steve Implies Believers Are Resealed
Steve makes the case that the believers who are protected are those who receive the seal. The only seal mentioned are of JEWISH TRIBES that are sealed in Revelation 7:4. Nevertheless, this claim would defy common sense, and I will make 2 relevant points here:
- The believer in this dispensation is sealed immediately after he believes. Eph 1:13, 4:30. To claim that believers must receive this seal during the tribulation to be protected from judgment defies the current Biblical position on the sealing of the believer RIGHT NOW. It has the implication that if the believer who is sealed now, survives going into the tribulation, that somehow he would have to be RE-sealed.
- This brings up a proof that the church will not be present. If believers are sealed now, and they are sealed after they believe, there would be no reason to seal anyone during the tribulation. The reason there is an event of sealing during the tribulation is obvious, because the church is gone!
Steve Asserts John Fails To Mention The Rapture
Steve claims that John would not likely leave out such a major event such as the rapture of the church in Revelation. However, this argument from silence works both ways: John doesn’t mention the church undergoing the judgments of Revelation 6-18 either.
The rapture of the church was a revelation that was given to Paul, the apostle to the Gentile church. An often overlooked passage that proves this is in 2 Peter 3:16, where Peter argues that there are some things that Paul discusses that are hard to be understood. Now if you notice, this statement is made in the context of PROPHECY. Peter and Paul were both apostles, and both received direct revelation from the Holy Spirit that breathed their writings. Therefore you would assume they would both have the same understanding of end time events, but yet Peter says Paul’s writings are hard to be understood.
Peter was obviously aware of Matthew 24, Daniel 9, Joel 2-3, Zechariah 12-14, Ezekial 37-39, Jeremiah 50-51, Mark 13, Luke 17 and 21, so he was familiar with the existing understanding of end time events that were described by all the prophets, and by Jesus. So what was so different about Paul’s eschatology from what Peter had already known from the above passages to prompt Peter to make this statement? THE RAPTURE OF THE CHURCH
Some Issues That Steve Ignores
While Steve boasts of having “scripture after scripture” to refute the claims of pre-tribbers, he fails to refute a large portion or even mention of primary texts that pre-tribbers use as proof of the rapture.
Angel With the Everlasting Gospel
Revelation 14:6 states “and I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaving, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth..” If the church was present during the tribulation, why would it be necessary for an angel to present the everlasting gospel to “them that dwell on the earth”? Is not that the churches commission at this very moment? It is painfully obvious that the necessity for Rev 14:6 is due to the fact that the entity responsible for bearing the gospel, the church, IS GONE.
[I have several texts that I intend to add later in this category]
One More Nugget.
Here’s something that caught my eye as I was memorizing the book of Revelation and it’s Revelation 18:20 which reads:
Rejoice over her (destruction of Babylon), thou heaven, and ye holy APOSTLES and PROPHETS; for God hath avenged you on her”
Now a few things I want the reader to notice here. There are 3 groups of people who are told to rejoice over the destruction of Babylon: those in heaven, the apostles, and the prophets. Notice that church is not mentioned here. Now using Steve’s logic, don’t you think that if the church underwent all of the judgments of the tribulation, that God would have included the church among those that were to rejoice for being persecuted? Did God not exact revenge on the whore for what she did to the church?
And the second thing to notice, and this is free! is that this verse demonstrates that the beast is not just ROME, but the beast is the entire system of empires that have been under control of Satan since Nimrod at Babylon in Genesis 11! Notice that the revenge exacted is on behalf of the PROPHETS. If Babylon is limited to ROME as the whore, WHEN DID ROME KILL THE PROPHETS!! They didn’t. They killed the apostles. The Babylonian empire, the Medo- Persian empire, the Greek empire killed the prophets.
Daniel makes the prophecy about the succession of the beast in Daniel 2 in the dream of Nebuchadnezzar which described the first kingdom as Babylon, followed by Medo- Persia, followed by Greece, and then Rome. This is why the description of the beast in Rev 13:2 is seen as a leopard, bear, and a lion. Their were different kingdoms BUT ALL ONE STATUE. Satan is described as being the “god of this world” (2 Cor 11:3) and how does a “god” rule a world? Through kingdoms. Thus Satan has always had a kingdom to rule with and this is the meaning behind the description of the beast in Revelation 13.
Therefore the beast (and there are 2 described in Rev 13, the first is the kingdom which at the time of the tribulation will be Rome) and then the false prophet. Steve erroneously describes the antichrist as the first beast. It’s not. The second beast described in Rev 13:11 is the false prophet, the first beast is the statue of Nebuchadnezzar with its final kingdom being that of Rome.
Additional Warnings About Steven Anderson
Steven Anderson has demonstrated a blatant lack of respect for government authority in a clearly unbiblical manner. While I am no fan of the current government, and believe it is an extension of the Roman Empire being used to usher in a new world order, there is a difference in criticizing the policies of a nation that are wicked, and being able to identify trends that reveal steps toward fulfilled prophecy, and personal belligerent attacks.
Consider the following statement made by Steve in a sermon preached about Barak Obama:
And yet you’re going to tell me that I’m supposed to pray for the socialist devil, murderer, infanticide, who wants to see young children and he wants to see babies killed through abortion and partial-birth abortion and all these different things — you’re gonna tell me I’m supposed to pray for God to give him a good lunch tomorrow while he’s in Phoenix, Arizona. Nope. I’m not gonna pray for his good. I’m going to pray that he dies and goes to hell. When I go to bed tonight, that’s what I’m going to pray. And you say, ‘Are you just saying that?’ No. When I go to bed tonight, Steven L. Anderson is going to pray for Barack Obama to die and go to hell,
I hate Barak Obama. You mean you hate what he does. No I hate him. I hate the person, and I’m gonna show you from the Bible why God wants me to hate Barak Obama.
Peter cast these type of people in with the same as various heathens: “But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.” 2 Peter 2:10.
Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves *damnation [*judgment of the government]. Romans 13:1-2
It is not a pastors job to correct the government without the procedures offered within the government to do so. They may be corrupt, they may not be to his liking, but God does not expect a Christian to act like a total fool and demand their “rights” and compromise their testimony before the world.
Furthermore, it is wholly unscriptural and just plain EVIL for a so-called Christian to pray that anyone dies and goes to hell.
And some have compassion, making a difference: and others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire hating even the garment spotted by the flesh. Jude 22-23
I could list 100 verses off the top of my head that demonstrate just how wrong Steven’s approach is here. I have personally heard Obama mock the Bible and Jesus, but that does not give me permission to pray for his death and eternal damnation. “Love your enemies and pray for those you persecute you and despitefully use you” (Matt 5) does not seem to be in the KJB that Steve claims to preach from. That is not Christianity, that is pure evil.
I will edit this later after I am finished with my notes on his video, and then tidy up the article for the grammar police, but Steve’s new video is nothing more than rehashed Augustinian theology, it relies on mostly suppositions, misrepresentations of what pre-tribbers believe and bold claims that pre-tribbers do not have any verses that prove the pre-trib rapture.
Steve argues that Christians merely do not want to fathom suffering persecution. The same argument could be used against him that he simply wants to be different from other fundamentalists by pursuing a martyrs complex in which he deliberately invites persecution from government entities by antagonizing them. It is odd that Steve would claim Christians fear persecution of tribulation, but then defies government officials by demanding his “rights”. If Christians are subject to persecution as a matter of God’s will, then why would Steve rely on his “rights” when the government persecutes him? Think about that Steve.
Steve ends his documentary with a statement that “I hope I can endure” (1:35:36) which is in direct conflict with his belief in eternal security, because the reference to enduring is “they that endure unto the end shall be saved” Matt 24:13.
While I can appreciate Steve’s stance on the King James Bible, his position on certain conspiracy theories which are not theories really but FACT, and much of his doctrine that is similar to fundamentalism, it is clear that Steve has yet to exercise proper Biblical hermeneutics, consistency in those whom a believer should consider a credible resource of information, and his defiance of government authority to me appear to give the impression that Steve has a desire to be recognized as being different “from the pack”. While his zeal is admirable, his priorities are not Biblical, and his eschatology leaves much to be desired, and the sensationalized claim that this film refutes the pre-tribulation rapture theory is more hype than an honest evaluation of the Bible and the claims of pre-trib proponents.
Dr James Ach and J/A