"The Antichrist" theory; a fable

[freeway]

by lenbache
"I believe that the traditional teaching about a coming false messiah called "the Antichrist" is a myth, and is not Biblical." so are you saying that bible scholars have got this all wrong... and somehow you have insight....I'm not trying to be a smart arrs.. but am truly curious to your understanding of what you believe..

"I believe that all end-time scriptures; Daniel, parts of Revelation, 2nd Thes.2, etc, are references to AMERICA." why and how.. I've read it and don't get the same conclusion...

"I believe that God has sent strong delusion to the churches of America because they will not believe the truth of these matters." the word of God is preached and spread about the world by America more than any other country... yes I do believe that the USA will and is falling from grace because of the actions it is now taking....and the bible does say that no one will come to the aid of Israel in the Gog Magog war...

 

[Paidion]

If man has invented "the Antichrist Theory", he must have invented it in the early years of Christianity! Irenaeus (120 - 202 A.D.) in Against Heresies Book V. Chapter 30. Section 4, wrote:

But he [the spirit of God through John] indicates the number of the name now, that when this man comes we may avoid him, being aware who he is: the name, however, is suppressed, because it is not worthy of being proclaimed by the Holy Spirit. For if it had been declared by Him, he [Antichrist] might perhaps continue for a long period. But now as “he was, and is not, and shall ascend out of the abyss, and goes into perdition,†as one who has no existence; so neither has his name been declared, for the name of that which does not exist is not proclaimed. But when this Antichrist shall have devastated all things in this world, he will reign for three years and six months, and sit in the temple at Jerusalem; and then the Lord will come from heaven in the clouds, in the glory of the Father, sending this man and those who follow him into the lake of fire; but bringing in for the righteous the times of the kingdom, that is, the rest, the hallowed seventh day; and restoring to Abraham the promised inheritance, in which kingdom the Lord declared, that “many coming from the east and from the west should sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.â€Â

 

[lenbache]

The prophetic scripture in Dan.9:25 about the reestablishment of the nation of Israel in 1948 is simply given as the starting point for the "last days" or 70 year timeline for Christ's return to this earth. That's the subject of verses 24 and 25.

Verses 26 and 27 and about AMERICA.

May I ask how yo came up this? If you are looking at Daniel and thinking he is talking about some "in our future" third Temple, you are way off.

Dan 9:25 isn't about the reestablishment of the Nation of Israel in 1948. It is about rebuilding Jerusalem and the Temple that was destroyed by the Babylonians. The decree to rebuild was given about 536-538 BC, most likely by Cyrus. The actual rebuilding began about 20 years later. Read the book of Ezra; it gives a general account of the rebuilding and by doing so, dates it's completion.

From somewhere around this point in time is where the 490 year prophesy is calculated.

Verses 9:26-27 are Messianic verses. Vs. 26 is describing the final destruction of the physical Temple in 70 AD. Vs. 27 is about Jesus establishing His new Covenant with the Jewish people and His death on the Cross effectively makes null all Temple the sacrifices and the oblations.

Remember, the veil torn in half represents the exposing of the most inner part of the Temple, The Holiest of Holies, making it available to all. The Bible speaks of a raising up of a new Temple, but He was talking about Himself. HE is the new Temple!

John 2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
John 2:20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
John 2:21 But he spake of the temple of his body.

Remember in Mark, it said:

Mark 14:58 We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.

Peace,
Vic

Daniel was an end-times prophet, vic. The events he wrote about were events which would be fulfilled at the time of the end, or last 70 years of time preceeding the 2nd Coming of Christ.

The angel had to keep reminding him of this in 8:7 for example.
Notice:
"Understand, O son of man: for "at the time of the end" shall be the vision."

 

[lenbache]

by lenbache
"I believe that the traditional teaching about a coming false messiah called "the Antichrist" is a myth, and is not Biblical." so are you saying that bible scholars have got this all wrong... and somehow you have insight....I'm not trying to be a smart arrs.. but am truly curious to your understanding of what you believe..

"I believe that all end-time scriptures; Daniel, parts of Revelation, 2nd Thes.2, etc, are references to AMERICA." why and how.. I've read it and don't get the same conclusion...

"I believe that God has sent strong delusion to the churches of America because they will not believe the truth of these matters." the word of God is preached and spread about the world by America more than any other country... yes I do believe that the USA will and is falling from grace because of the actions it is now taking....and the bible does say that no one will come to the aid of Israel in the Gog Magog war...

I don't claim to have any "special insight" into the prophetic scriptures.
Most ANYONE can understand those scriptures today because America has fulfilled them all. Thus they are all quite recognizable.

 

[lenbache]

If man has invented "the Antichrist Theory", he must have invented it in the early years of Christianity! Irenaeus (120 - 202 A.D.) in Against Heresies Book V. Chapter 30. Section 4, wrote:

But he [the spirit of God through John] indicates the number of the name now, that when this man comes we may avoid him, being aware who he is: the name, however, is suppressed, because it is not worthy of being proclaimed by the Holy Spirit. For if it had been declared by Him, he [Antichrist] might perhaps continue for a long period. But now as “he was, and is not, and shall ascend out of the abyss, and goes into perdition,†as one who has no existence; so neither has his name been declared, for the name of that which does not exist is not proclaimed. But when this Antichrist shall have devastated all things in this world, he will reign for three years and six months, and sit in the temple at Jerusalem; and then the Lord will come from heaven in the clouds, in the glory of the Father, sending this man and those who follow him into the lake of fire; but bringing in for the righteous the times of the kingdom, that is, the rest, the hallowed seventh day; and restoring to Abraham the promised inheritance, in which kingdom the Lord declared, that “many coming from the east and from the west should sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.â€Â

The ones who invented "the Antichrist" theory COULD NOT have interpreted the scriptures correctly because those scriptures had to come to pass before they could be understood.

No one could have understood them just 50 years ago.
We can understand them now, however, because they've come to pass.

 

[Vic C.]

Daniel was an end-times prophet, vic. The events he wrote about were events which would be fulfilled at the time of the end, or last 70 years of time preceeding the 2nd Coming of Christ.

The angel had to keep reminding him of this in 8:7 for example.
Notice:
"Understand, O son of man: for "at the time of the end" shall be the vision."

I will agree that some of Daniel may be in our future, but some of it already took place on our past. The Reformers realized this. I truly believe their understanding of Daniel 9:24-27 to be correct. I always didn't believe this way. The Spirit has opened my mind to the belief that some prophesy is now "history pre-written".

he angel had to keep reminding him of this in 8:7 for example.
Notice:
"Understand, O son of man: for "at the time of the end" shall be the vision."

Er, Daniel 8:7 says:

And I saw him come close unto the ram, and he was moved with choler against him, and smote the ram, and brake his two horns: and there was no power in the ram to stand before him, but he cast him down to the ground, and stamped upon him: and there was none that could deliver the ram out of his hand.

I assume you meant 8:17.


I don't want to put you on the spot, but maybe I missed where you told us what you believe Daniel 9 to be about. So... since I only addressed part of that chapter in my last post, could you explain your beliefs about Daniel 9, specifically that latter part of the chapter?

Thanks,
Vic

 

[samuel]

What lenbache is saying, is a popular 7th Adventist interpretation. Christ himself spoke of the Anti-Christ, when he said "I come in my Fathers name, and you receive me not". "Another shall come in his own name, him shall ye recieve". This he said to the Pharisees.

Bible prophesy is centered around Israel, not the USA or any other country. The Babylon of Revelation is not a city in Iraq, but the last World power, and the Apostate church. The harlot that rides the beast, is not the Catholic Church, but Israel itself. Israel was the first to shun Gods rule, and turn to the world, and is not the last in a long line of successors. But she is the Mother (first) of all Harlots.

 

[Vic C.]

What lenbache is saying, is a popular 7th Adventist interpretation. Christ himself spoke of the Anti-Christ, when he said "I come in my Fathers name, and you receive me not". "Another shall come in his own name, him shall ye recieve". This he said to the Pharisees.

Yes, some of it is, but the SDA also believes the historical interpretation I presented.

Bible prophesy is centered around Israel, not the USA or any other country. The Babylon of Revelation is not a city in Iraq, but the last World power, and the Apostate church. The harlot that rides the beast, is not the Catholic Church, but Israel itself. Israel was the first to shun Gods rule, and turn to the world, and is not the last in a long line of successors. But she is the Mother (first) of all Harlots.

Yup, we've both posted similar beliefs before and agreed. i understand the harlot to be Israel also.

 

[samuel]

Yes I have a friend who is SDA. Their interpretation of Prophesy is all historical. No battle of Armageddon, no Rapture, just the sudden appearance of Jesus at the end of days.

Well if it is all historical, then we must be in the millennium, which SDA does not accept either. But if this is the millennium, I would have hated to been around for the first part. :

Of course Christ hasn't come for the second time, so this can't be the millennium. But I don't think we can blame all of the book of Revelation, on the Romans either. It just does not jive! with the rest of scripture.

 

[brakelite2]

May I ask how yo came up this? If you are looking at Daniel and thinking he is talking about some "in our future" third Temple, you are way off.

Dan 9:25 isn't about the reestablishment of the Nation of Israel in 1948. It is about rebuilding Jerusalem and the Temple that was destroyed by the Babylonians. The decree to rebuild was given about 536-538 BC, most likely by Cyrus. The actual rebuilding began about 20 years later. Read the book of Ezra; it gives a general account of the rebuilding and by doing so, dates it's completion.

From somewhere around this point in time is where the 490 year prophesy is calculated.

Verses 9:26-27 are Messianic verses. Vs. 26 is describing the final destruction of the physical Temple in 70 AD. Vs. 27 is about Jesus establishing His new Covenant with the Jewish people and His death on the Cross effectively makes null all Temple the sacrifices and the oblations.

Remember, the veil torn in half represents the exposing of the most inner part of the Temple, The Holiest of Holies, making it available to all. The Bible speaks of a raising up of a new Temple, but He was talking about Himself. HE is the new Temple!

Hooray!!!!! Some-one who can read the Bible! Awesome my friend. It is rare indeed to find some-one who doesn't accept the 'antichrist' theory connected to Daniel 9:27.
I differ however with your start date for the 70 weeks. Artaxerxes gave the fullest decree which included the wall and the temple. This would allow full restoration of Jewish life both religiously and secularly. The date was 457 BC. 70 weeks added to that date (490 years) takes us to 34 AD.
69 weeks to Messiah the Prince. 27AD, His baptism. His formal announcement of the 'time is come' and to present the kingdom of God. It was at His Baptism where He received His anointing, and His Messiahship confirmed verbally by His Father.
The one week remaining began at that time. (7 years). In the midst of that one week Messiah was 'cut off'., but not for Himself. For us. The crucifixion took place 31AD. Exactly 1/2 way through the 70th week, after 3 1/2 years of personal ministry. At that point the sacrifices and oblations ceased to have any meaning. They were from that time on empty and pointless.
The last 3 1/2 years were taken up by the apostles. They were instructed to go not to the gentiles, but to the lost house of Israel. This they did. Until the stoning of Steven, and the establishment of Paul's ministry who was the apostle to the gentiles, in 34AD. Exactly 490 years after the going forth of the commandment to rebuild Jerusalem.

Note: there is no final week still to be concluded. The prophecy is done and dusted. It was a sign post for Israel that they may recognise their Messiah. It is not a sign post for us to recognise the antichrist or any '7 year tribulation' period in the future. That being therefore established, the entire pack of cards called "The Left Behind" series falls down on it's collective ear. Because the whole scenario of the establishment of Israel and the reesatblishment of the temple and it's sacrifices, also the future antichrist and the 7 year tribulation period all owe their existence to the misinterpretation and misapplication of Daniel 9:25-27.

Not that I concur however with the OP's contention that 'antichrist' is a myth. Daniel's prophecies began to be fulfilled in his own lifetime, and continue to be fulfilled today. As they came to pass at various times down through history, the people of God recognised their fulfillment. Newton has already been given as a good example. Another was G K Chesterton. Others of course the reformers of the 16th and 17th centuries. Before them there was Tyndale and Wycliffe among others. They all recognised readily the identity of antichrist. They were not mistaken.
The last week therefore was solely designated as the time that the covenant was confirmed.

 

[brakelite2]

Yes I have a friend who is SDA. Their interpretation of Prophesy is all historical. No battle of Armageddon, no Rapture, just the sudden appearance of Jesus at the end of days.

They do accept a battle of Armageddon, just a different cocept from most. They believe the battle is between the world and the church. Not nations agaionst one another.
They also believe that there is no rapture prior to the second coming. This is based on sound biblical exegisis, but does not deny that the saints will indeed be 'taken up'. It is just the timing that differs. (I can give you sound reasons for this on another thread if you like.)

Well if it is all historical, then we must be in the millennium, which SDA does not accept either. But if this is the millennium, I would have hated to been around for the first part. :

Again, you misunderstand SDA teaching. There are many denominatioal groups and individuals who believe that we are now in the millenium. The SDA church is not one of them. They believe, and with good reason, that the millenium begins with the second coming. What they also believe is that it is in heaven, and not on earth.

 

[lenbache]

Daniel was an end-times prophet, vic. The events he wrote about were events which would be fulfilled at the time of the end, or last 70 years of time preceeding the 2nd Coming of Christ.

The angel had to keep reminding him of this in 8:7 for example.
Notice:
"Understand, O son of man: for "at the time of the end" shall be the vision."

I will agree that some of Daniel may be in our future, but some of it already took place on our past. The Reformers realized this. I truly believe their understanding of Daniel 9:24-27 to be correct. I always didn't believe this way. The Spirit has opened my mind to the belief that some prophesy is now "history pre-written".

he angel had to keep reminding him of this in 8:7 for example.
Notice:
"Understand, O son of man: for "at the time of the end" shall be the vision."

Er, Daniel 8:7 says:

And I saw him come close unto the ram, and he was moved with choler against him, and smote the ram, and brake his two horns: and there was no power in the ram to stand before him, but he cast him down to the ground, and stamped upon him: and there was none that could deliver the ram out of his hand.

I assume you meant 8:17.


I don't want to put you on the spot, but maybe I missed where you told us what you believe Daniel 9 to be about. So... since I only addressed part of that chapter in my last post, could you explain your beliefs about Daniel 9, specifically that latter part of the chapter?

Thanks,
Vic

vic,
As I previously stated, I believe that Danial 9:24 through 27 is a summation of events that occur on earth during the last 70 years of time leading up to Christ's return.

Without violating the rules of this liberal and politically correct generation, I will not say who the man of lawlessness is that's upon America. Just know that he is described in both Daniel and Revelation as "the ten horns".

Having said that, here's my interpretaion of verses 25, 26, and 27 of Dan.9.

(25) In 1948 the nation of Israel shall be rebuilt.

(26) And after 1962 the worship of Christ shall be cut off from America's public schools, and afterwards the man of lawlessness will corrupt and destroy America; their sanctuary.

(27) And for one year the man of lawlessness will confirm along with many America's covenant with God, but in the midst of the following year (of 1963) the daily school prayer will be taken away, and the abomination that renders the European Americans desolate will spread until God's wrath is poured out upon America.

 

[Vic C.]

brakelite2,

What I posted was from the top of my head. I'm not above being corrected, so thanks for supplying the dates. Another important event that ties in with Stephen's stoning was the conversion of the first Gentile; Cornelius, beginning in Acts 10.

I'm not SDA and I fought the SDAs here on that interpretation. It finally clicked when I read Newton's observation on Daniel 9.

 

[Paidion]

The ones who invented "the Antichrist" theory COULD NOT have interpreted the scriptures correctly because those scriptures had to come to pass before they could be understood.

No one could have understood them just 50 years ago.
We can understand them now, however, because they've come to pass.

REALLY! This is news to me. To which scriptures do you refer? And in what way did they come to pass in the last 50 years? And who did the Antichrist turn out to be?

 

[brakelite2]

brakelite2,

What I posted was from the top of my head. I'm not above being corrected, so thanks for supplying the dates. Another important event that ties in with Stephen's stoning was the conversion of the first Gentile; Cornelius, beginning in Acts 10.

I'm not SDA and I fought the SDAs here on that interpretation. It finally clicked when I read Newton's observation on Daniel 9.

Heh, heh. Hi Vic. It is only recently that I discovered how well Newton had done in his studies.. I never knew he was such a student of the scriptures. And at a time when studying for yourself was not just unfashionable in most European circles, but starkly against prevailing church doctrine. In those days you believed what the church told you concerning the scriptures, or get burnt. There are some in this forum I have noticed in my short time here who need to do the same, rather than trot out the same old party line.
Here's a couple of quotes from Newton that I find particularly interesting and insightful.

God gave the prophecies, not to gratify men's curiosity by enabling them to fore know things, but that after they were fulfilled they might be interpreted by the event, and His own providence, not the interpreters, be thereby manifested to the world.

"About the time of the end, a body of men will be raised up who will turn their attention to the Prophecies, and insist upon their literal interpretation, in the midst of much clamor and opposition."

Sir Isaac Newton (1642 - 1727)

Regards
Brakelite

 

[lenbache]

The ones who invented "the Antichrist" theory COULD NOT have interpreted the scriptures correctly because those scriptures had to come to pass before they could be understood.

No one could have understood them just 50 years ago.
We can understand them now, however, because they've come to pass.

REALLY! This is news to me. To which scriptures do you refer? And in what way did they come to pass in the last 50 years? And who did the Antichrist turn out to be?

Did you not read the title of this thread?

Once again, there is no scripture which speaks of a coming false messiah called "the Antichrist, therefore no one by that name will EVER appear on this earth.

The man of lawlessness; commonly referred to as the Antichrist, is not an individual man, but rather a nationality of man. That nationality of man is depicted as "the ten horns" in Daniel and in Revelation.

Until you come to recognize this, then obviously any other explanations I may offer would not be accepted by you.

Study the scriptures regarding the ten horns. Find out for yourself which nation it is today that has those ten horns.
(hint) You'll find that they are upon "Babylon" in Rev.17.

Ask yourself the question: Which nation today best fits the description of Babylon?, and which nationality of man best represents the ten horns that are upon it.

Happy studying.

 

[KenEOTE]

Actually I would say that Germany best fits it. That is where the reformation began, and then lead to the Holocaust and no a very humanistic world view. Once they were a great Christian Nation now they are pretty much atheistic. History would then point to Germany. Germany and most the European Countries out due America in falling away from Christ.

 

[lenbache]

Actually I would say that Germany best fits it. That is where the reformation began, and then lead to the Holocaust and no a very humanistic world view. Once they were a great Christian Nation now they are pretty much atheistic. History would then point to Germany. Germany and most the European Countries out due America in falling away from Christ.

(sigh) "Ever learning, but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth", God says of this generation.

Tell me, Ken, Do you have any knowledge whatsoever of America's Christian heritage?!

 

[Catholic Crusader]

A few excerpts from the Catholic Encyclopedia entry for "Antichrist":
source:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm

Antichrist
(Greek Antichristos).

In composition anti has different meanings: antibasileus denotes a king who fills an interregnum; antistrategos, a propraetor; anthoupatos, a proconsul; in Homer antitheos denotes one resembling a god in power and beauty, while in other works it stands for a hostile god. Following mere analogy one might interpret antichristos as denoting one resembling Christ in appearance and power; but it is safer to define the word according to its biblical and ecclesiastical usage.

Biblical meaning of the word

The word Antichrist occurs only in the Johannine Epistles; but there are so-called real parallelisms to these occurrences in the Apocalypse, in the Pauline Epistles, and less explicit ones in the Gospels and the Book of Daniel.

In the Johannine epistles

St. John supposes in his Epistles that the early Christians are acquainted with the teaching concerning the coming of Antichrist. "You have heard that Antichrist cometh" (1 John 2:18); "This is Antichrist, of whom you have heard that he cometh" (1 John 4:3). Though the Apostle speaks of several Antichrists, he distinguishes between the many and the one principal agent: "Antichrist cometh, even now there are become many Antichrists" (1 John 2:18). Again, the writer outlines the character and work of Antichrist: "They went out from us, but they were not of us" (1 John 2;19); "Who is a liar, but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is Antichrist, who denies the Father, and the Son" (1 John 2:22); "And every spirit that dissolveth Jesus, is not of God; and this is Antichrist" (1 John 4:3); "For many seducers are gone out into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh: this is a seducer and an Antichrist" (2 John 7). Also the time, the Apostle places the coming of Antichrist at "the last hour" (1 John 2:18); again he maintains that "he is now already in the world" (1 John 4:3).

In the Apocalypse

Nearly all commentators find Antichrist mentioned in the Apocalypse, but they do not agree as to the particular chapter of the Book in which the mention occurs. Some point to the "beast" of 11:7, others to the "red dragon" of Chapter 12, others again to the beast "having seven heads and ten horns" of 13, sqq., while many scholars identify Antichrist with the beast which had "two horns, like a lamb" and spoke "as a dragon" (13:11, sqq.), or with the scarlet-coloured beast "having seven heads and ten horns" (17), or, finally, with Satan "loosed out of his prison," and seducing the nations (20:7, sqq.). A detailed discussion of the reasons for and against each of these opinions would be out of place here.

read the rest at
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm

 

[KenEOTE]

"Ever learning, but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth", God says of this generation.

Tell me, Ken, Do you have any knowledge whatsoever of America's Christian heritage?!

I like the way you try to insult me with your quote. Yes I do have a vast knowledge of the Christian Heritage of America. I have actually worked on 3 documentaries about it. I live in Washington D.C. and have taught my children about the heritage of the United States.

But do you have a knowledge of Europe's Christian Heritage? Have you been over there to see the once religious centers now empty? Luther's own church is now more a museum than a place of worship. You speak of Ten Horns and small horn and so on. One could make an Argument for the European union as the Lawless man.

If America is the "lawless man" what effect does that have on me? None. I am covered by Christ. I have nothing to worry about.