Cornelius said:
I want to look at a Biblical view of antichrist.
Popular Christian views make antichrist out to be a man. They look at the symbolic language of Daniel to come to that conclusion, because nowhere in the New Testament are we ever told it will be a man.
I am going to look at the Biblical view, which teaches us that antichrist is a spirit , that inhabits ALL who are not in the body of Christ. I will show that it is a spirit that is already in the world.
Will there be a man at the head of this "body of antichrist " ?
Most probably yes, but this will not make him THE ANTICHRIST (there is no such thing)
I'm not following. It is true that anyone denying Christ is antichrist, in the sense that there are many (1 Jn.2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 Jn.7), but the one referred to first in 1 Jn.2:18 is yet to come.
There is a man who is this antichrist and is going to be revealed right after the Rapture (2 Thes.2:3-8). He is a specific man that will come into power as seen by his many titles through history.
(Dake's Annotated Reference Bible is the source)
The Titles of the Antichrist
(1) "Antichrist." This is the most common one we use in speaking of him for he is to be the great opponent of Christ at the end of the age. The word occurs only four times in the Bible (1 John 2:18,22; 4:3; 2 John 7), but the studies above and below show him to be the one who has that title more than any other and is to be the one expressly stated to come according to these passages.
(2) "The Assyrian" (Isa. 10:20-27; 30:18-33; 31:4 - 32:20; Mic. 5:3-15). The prophecies in these passages were recorded against the Assyrian king in the days of the prophets, but a study of them reveals that they have a latter-day fulfillment in the future Assyrian king who is to oppress Israel just preceding her final restoration. (The Assyrian territory will be part of Antichrist's kingdom and in that sense he is the king of Assyria.)
This first passage (Isa. 10:20-27) refers to the "remnant" of Rev. 12:17: "IN THAT DAY the remnant of Israel.... shall NO MORE again stay [Hebrew, look for support] upon him [Antichrist] that smote them; but shall stay upon the Lord. . . . O my people THAT DWELLEST IN ZION, be not afraid of THE ASSYRIAN: he shall smite thee with a rod . . . yet a little while [1,260 days, Rev. 12:6, 14-17; 13: 5], and the indignation Hebrew, God's anger and wrath, the day of vengeance in the tribulation, as in Isa. 26:20; Dan. 8:19; 11:36] shall cease, and MINE ANGER IN THEIR DESTRUCTION.... IN THAT DAY his burden shall be taken away from off thy shoulder . . . the yoke shall be destroyed BECAUSE OF THE ANOINTING." The Hebrew root for "anointing" is shawman, to shine, and no doubt refers to the brightness of Christ's coming in 2 Thess. 2:8, 9.
The second passage (Isa. 30:18-33) clearly refers to Israel's final restoration under the Messiah: "Therefore will he [the Lord] be exalted . . . the people shall dwell in Zion at Jerusalem: thou shalt weep NO MORE . . . IN THE DAY that the Lord bindeth the breach of his people . . . the name of the Lord cometh from far, burning with his anger . . . to sift the nations . . . with the flame of a burning fire, with scattering, and tempest. and hailstones. For through the voice of the Lord shall THE ASSYRIAN BE BEATEN DOWN." (See also Ezek. 38:17-21; 2 Thess. 1:7-10; 2:8-12.)
The third passage (Isa. 31:4 - 32:20) speaks of the same truth: "Like as the lion roaring on his prey . . . shall the Lord of hosts COME DOWN TO FIGHT FOR MOUNT ZION . . . As birds flying so will the Lord of hosts DEFEND JERUSALEM; defending also HE WILL DELIVER IT; and PASSING OVER HE WILL PRESERVE IT . . . For IN THAT DAY every man shall cast away his idols . . . THEN shall THE ASSYRIAN FALL WITH THE SWORD, not of a mighty man [but by Christ, 2 Thess. 2:8, 91. . . a king shall reign in righteousness . . . And my people shall dwell in a peaceable habitation, and in sure dwellings, and in quiet resting places."
The last passage (Micah 5:3-15) definitely speaks of Israel being given up "UNTIL the time that she which travaileth hath brought forth [until Israel has brought forth the manchild, as we have seen in the previous lesson]: THEN the remnant of his brethren shall return unto the children of Israel. And he Christ, verses 1, 21, shall stand and feed in the strength of the Lord . . . now shall he be great UNTO THE ENDS OF THE EARTH. And THIS MAN shall be the peace, WHEN THE ASSRYIAN [Antichrist] SHALL COME INTO OUR LAND: and SHALL TREAD IN OUR PALACES ... thus shall he deliver us from THE ASSYRIAN.... I will execute vengeance in anger and fury upon the heathen, such as they have not heard." (See also Dan. 9:27; 11:40-45; 2 Thess. 2:3-4; Rev. 13.)
(3) "The king of Babylon" (Isa. 14:4). This passage is in a prophecy of Babylon which had a partial fulfillment in the overthrow of Babylon by the Medes and Persians (Isa. 13:17). The complete fulfillment will be in the last days under Antichrist, as is proved by the mention of "the day of the Lord" and the restoration of Israel, which will occur when Christ comes to Earth in the days of the reign of Antichrist (Isa. 13:6-16, 19-22; 14:1-8 18-27). All these prophecies have never been fulfilled as stated here. Antichrist will be the king of Babylon because he will be the king of Assyria, which will include Babylon, as we have seen in our study of Babylon in Lesson Forty-one.
(4) "The spoiler" and "the extortioner" (Isa. 16:1-5). That these terms refer to Antichrist is clear from a study of this passage in Lesson Forty-five, Point I.
(5) "Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal" (Ezek. 38, 39). These two chapters will be fulfilled at Armageddon, as seen in Lesson Forty-nine.
(6) The "little horn" (Dan. 7:8,24; 8:9,23).
(7) "A king of fierce countenance" (Dan. 8:23).
(8) "The prince that shall come" (Dan. 9:26, 27). This title refers to the same man as does the "little horn" coming from the ten kingdoms of Revised Rome who will make the seven years covenant with Israel and then break it in the middle of the Week and cause the abomination of desolation in the Jewish temple at Jerusalem, as seen in Lesson Forty.
(9) "The king of the north" (Dan. 11:36-45). This is the king of the Syrian division of the old Grecian Empire as we have seen in our study of Daniel in Lesson Thirty-nine. He is called the king of the north because he will come from the northern division of old Greece, that is, north of Palestine. Many Bible teachers say the Antichrist will come from Russia and use this term to prove it, but if "the king of the north" refers to Russia, then what countries are there north of Russia that could fight against Russia, as is required in Dan. 11:44? There are none, so this title applies to the future king of Syria-the northern division of the four divisions of the old Grecian Empire out of which Antichrist must come (Dan. 8:8, 9, 20-25).
(10) "The man of sin" (2 Thess. 2:1-12).
(11) "The son of perdition" (2 Thess. 2:1-12).
(12) "The wicked" and "that wicked" (Isa. 11:4; 2 Thess. 2:1-12). These last four titles picture the Antichrist in his role as the most sinful and wicked man of his time and perhaps all time, for he will literally murder multitudes who will not conform to his every desire (Rev. 7:9-17; 13:16-18; 15:1-3; 20:4-6). For this wickedness he is "the son of perdition," because he is destined to perdition, or destruction and eternal Hell.
The theory that Antichrist is the mystery of iniquity or Satan manifest in the flesh as Jesus was the mystery of godliness, or God manifest in the flesh; that Antichrist will be "the son of perdition" or the son of Satan by a woman, as Jesus was "the Son of God" by a woman; and that Antichrist is the opposite of Christ in every detail is not taught in Scripture. That Antichrist is a mysterious personage and will be such a man of mystery in all that he does is false. Not one statement in Scripture about him is mysterious, or teaches that he will be supernatural, an immortal man from the Abyss, an incarnation of the devil, or a natural son of the devil, as we shall see in the next two lessons.
The phrase mystery of iniquity literally means the invisible spirit of lawlessness or the evil spirit forces that cause man to sin (John 8:44; 14:30; Eph. 2:1-3; l John 3:8; Eph. 6:10-18; 2 Cor. 4:3,4). The same men who teach Antichrist is the mystery of iniquity teach that he is the beast now bound in the Abyss and will come out again as the Antichrist. They teach that this spirit is Judas who will be reincarnated, and their main argument is that Judas and Antichrist are both called "the son of perdition" (John 17:12; 2 Thess. 2:14). As we shall see in the next two lessons, neither has any human being ever gone into the Abyss, nor will one ever go there, and therefore, Judas could not be in the pit to come out. The expression "the son of perdition" literally means the son of destruction, because both Judas and Antichrist are destined to destruction, but not because they are natural sons of Satan. They could not be sons of Satan and be the sons of their earthly fathers at the same time. They could not be natural sons of Satan and incarnations of him too, as taught by some.
In the Greek it reads the son of the destruction just as it reads "the man of the sin." This last phrase does not limit the Antichrist as being the only man of sin and the former phrase does not limit him to be the only son of destruction. The Hebrews and Greeks called any man who was subject to a particular evil or characteristic, the son of that trait, as "sons of Belial" (1 Sam. 1:16; 2:12; 25:17, 25; I Kings 21:10), "child of the devil" (Acts 13:10), "children of the wicked one" (Matt. 13:38), "children of the devil" (1 John 3:10), "children of wisdom" (Luke 7:35); "children of the world" (Luke 16:8), "children of light" (Luke 16:8; John 12:36), "children of disobedience" (Eph. 2:1-3; 5:6-8; Col. 3:6). Also anyone who was destined to some particular fate was called the child of that destiny, as "children of the kingdom" (Matt. 8:12), "children of wrath" (Eph. 2:1-3), "children of the resurrection" (Luke 20:36). Therefore, in view of this usual practice mentioned above it would be only natural to call both Judas and Antichrist "the son of perdition" or destruction, for both are destined to destruction in Hell, because of their sin.
The word perdition is used only eight times and is from the Greek apoleia, meaning ruin, loss, destruction, perdition, and perish. It is never used as a name of the devil; hence to call Judas and Antichrist sons of the devil by a woman is not biblical. Neither is it stated in Scripture that Judas ever was or ever will be, nor that the future Antichrist ever will be a direct and literal child of the devil by a woman. Such statement is as far from truth as the devil himself. Try to substitute the word devil for perdition in all other places where it is found, and see if it makes sense (Phil. 1:28- 1 Tim. 6:9; Heb. 10:39; 2 Pet. 3:7; Rev. 17:8,11). The Greek word apoleia is translated "destruction" (Matt. 7:13; Rom. 9:22; Phil. 3:19; 2 Pet. 2:1; 3:16), "damnation" (2 Pet. 2:3), "die" (Acts 25:16), "perish" (Acts 8:20), and in other ways, but never as devil. We can conclude then that "son of perdition" does not mean son of the devil.
All other statements about the Antichrist coming in his own name (John 5:43), exalting himself (2 Thess. 2:4), being worshipped (Rev. 13:8), being cast into Hell (Rev. 19:20), doing his own will (Dan. l1:36), destroying men (Dan. 8:24), being wicked (2 Thess. 2:3-8), and other facts about him, do not prove he is such a super being and a mystery as men teach. All these statements can be understood in connection with any natural and mortal man, as we shall see. If Antichrist is the mystery of lawlessness, then he has been here all the time and he cannot come from the pit, for Paul said this mystery was already working in his day (2 Thess. 2:7). Men try to find so many hidden meanings in the Bible, and many spend a lifetime trying to make the Bible a mystery instead of seeking to make it the simple book it really is. All such hidden interpretations must be rejected for the sake of simple truth.
The devil is never going to have a natural son by a woman. Gen. 3:15 certainly does not teach such a thing. The seed of the serpent should be understood as the natural offspring of snakes and to the spiritual children of the devil (Matt. 13:38; 1 John 3:8-10; John 8:44). This last passage is taken by some to mean Antichrist will be a natural seed of the devil, "Ye are of your father the devil.... When he speaketh a LIE, he speaketh of his own; for he is a LIAR, and the father of IT." It is claimed that the word "IT" refers to one particular son of the devil, the Antichrist, but this is not only proved false by the same passage that speaks of all men as being "of your father the devil," but it is also proved ridiculous by the same passage. The "LIE" refers to a literal lie and not to a natural son of the devil by a woman. If telling a lie can be turned into a natural son of the devil in this passage, then we can make natural sons of Satan in Acts 5:3; Rom. 1:25; Psalms 78:36, and all other places in Scripture where lies were spoken. If the "LIE" here means the natural son of the devil that he is going to have by a woman, then he is going to "speak" this son into existence and if this be true, then he could not be a natural son by a woman or by an incarnation of himself, as some men teach. If he could do this he would be speaking enough sons into existence to fill the Earth, so he would have a better chance to defeat God. Such teaching is plain foolishness.
It is also argued that Judas was the only one ever called a "devil," thus proving further that he was the devil incarnate, or that he was the mystery of iniquity, and a son of perdition (John 6:70, 71; 17:12). The definite article Abe is used, thus making Judas "the devil," but the definite article is not in the Greek at all, which means a devil. The Greek word for devil is diabolos and means adversary or slanderer and is used of other men who are called "false accusers" (2 Tim. 3:3; Tit. 2:3) and "slanderers" (1 Tim. 3:11). Since the word is used of other men, then it is clear that Judas is not the only one it is used of, as is claimed. The word never implies an incarnation, as some argue. If so, then these other men who are slanderers (devils) were also incarnations of the devil, and in this case the above theory is destroyed. The devil never incarnates himself in the Antichrist any more than he did Judas, for the dragon is always seen as a separate person outside the beast.
If Judas were the devil incarnate then the devil was the son of Simon, a human being, so he could not have been created of God and could not have existed until the time of Christ (John 6:70, 71). According to this reasoning, it was the devil that betrayed Jesus (Matt. 10:4), that Jesus chose as one of His own trusted disciples and planned to give him a throne in the eternal kingdom (Matt. 10:1-8; Luke 22: 28-30), that received power from the Holy Spirit through Jesus to cast out himself and his demons and to destroy his own work (Matt. 6:7-13), that followed Jesus and had fellowship with Him for over three years (Psalms 41:9; 55:12, 13), that had a place in the bishopric and fell from it by transgression (Acts 1:15-25; 109:8), that lost his name out of the book of life (Acts 1:20 with Psalms 69:25-28), that entered into himself to betray Jesus (Luke 22:3), that carried the bag and was the trusted treasurer of the apostolic band (John 13:29), that repented himself for betraying Jesus (Matt. 27:3-10), that hung himself (Matt. 27:5), and that had his bowels gush out and was buried in a potter's field (Acts 1:17-20). Who could believe these things happened to the devil?
If Judas were the devil incarnate then it was Judas that was a created being and an angel that ruled the Earth before Adam and that invaded Heaven and was cast out (Isa. 14:12-14; Ezek. 28:11-17; Luke 10:18), that opposed Israel and smote Job with boils and has present access to Heaven (2 Chron. 21:1; Job 1:6-2:7), that stood at his own right hand to betray Jesus and became childless ever afterward (Psalms 109:20), that tempted Christ (Matt. 4:1-11), that used Peter as a tool (Matt. 16:23), that caused all the sickness in men (Acts 10:38; Luke 13:16), that was still alive and worked against early believers after he committed suicide (Acts 5:3; 26:18), and that does all the things that the devil does in all Scriptures. (See the words "Satan" and "Devil" in a concordance and see the many things that Judas did from creation until now and is yet supposed to do to oppose God, if he is the devil.)
If the Antichrist is going to be the devil incarnate, then we would have to conclude that the devil has not yet come (1 John 2:18; John 5:43), that he will not come until after ten kingdoms are formed inside the Roman Empire (Dan. 7:24) and after the rapture of the church (2 Thess. 2:7,8), that he will continue only forty-two months when he does come (Rev. 13:5), that the devil is a "man" (Rev. 13:18), that this man is in Heaven now accusing the saints and will be cast out of Heaven in the middle of the Week (Rev. 12:7-17; 13:1-8), that the dragon is not a separate person outside the beast as he is pictured as being in all passages on the subject (Rev. 13:2-4; 16:13-16; 19:20; 20:10), that the devil is to be "slain" by Christ at His second advent (Dan. 7:11; Isa. 11:4; 2 Thess. 2:8, 9), that he is to be put into two different places during the Millennium, for the beast is in the lake of fire and the dragon is in the abyss during that time (Rev. 19:20; 20:1-3), that the devil is still in the lake of fire while he is loosed at the end of the Millennium and that he will be again cast back where he already is and has always been since Armageddon (Rev. 19:20; 20:1-10), and that the devil has died once and will die twice in the future if we are to believe the theories of men concerning Antichrist.
We would also have to believe that Judas became his own father when he incarnated himself in a woman and was born, that he died and will become incarnated again in a woman in the latter days and will become a second incarnation of the devil, or of himself. How could any person become nothing but a seed in a woman twice and grow from nothing but a seed to a full grown man twice? How could the devil as an immortal angel be a man and die three times? How could he be the devil outside of both Judas and the Antichrist and still be an incarnation of the devil in both? How could the devil enter into Judas if he were Judas? How could he give his power to the Antichrist and be a dragon outside of him and still be the Antichrist? How could he be the beast in the lake of fire and still be himself in the pit? These and other ridiculous theories we would have to believe if we accepted as truth what some men teach on the subject of Antichrist as being both Judas and the devil. These teachings are not the truth about the devil, Judas, or the Antichrist, or about the head wounded to death, as we shall see in the next two lessons.
(
13) "The beast" (Dan. 7:11; Rev. 13:1-18; 14:9-11; 15:2, 3; 16:2, 10; 17:1-18; 19:19-21; 20:2-4, 10). This beast will be explained in the next two lessons.
8. His Person. All the above studies prove that the Antichrist is to be a real person and not a religious System or the successive head of some system as the pope, and that he is yet to come in the future and will literally fulfill all the prophecies concerning himself. His character and characteristics are clearly implied in the points above, which reveal that he will be a man who will possess the talent and leadership of all previously gifted conquerors and leaders. In addition to these natural gifts, he will possess the miraculous power of attracting people of every class, fascinating them with his marvelous personality, successes, wisdom, administrative and executive ability, and bringing them under his control through his well-directed flattery and masterly diplomacy. He will be indued with the power of Satan in the exercise of these gifts until the world will wonder after him and many will worship him as God. Some of his titles, the operations of his power, his wars, and other points of interest concerning him will be given in following lessons.
â€â€Dake's Topics
However, good old Webster's tells us that it is a deep chasm. It isn't just of the ocean but as one of the definitions states..."anything to deep for measurement. Another is "bottomless gulf"."
