The identity of the antichrist in 5 verses

[Sinthesis]

QUOTE="john darling, post: 1080890, member: 7650"]I find it strange that you think the concept of money does not rely on forcing payment especially since you make that very point in your own post. You say, "How about you go down to the store and see if they give you what you need".

You see, you recognize that the grocery store will not help unless money is exchanged. No money, No help. This is how it works in nearly all businesses, and it is not consistent with what Jesus taught. The real question is, why do you deny this concept of forced help in one sentence then go on to prove it in the next?

Money does not force commerce, rather it facilitates agreement on price between the buyer and seller. If your view was true then you could force someone to sell you anything for a single dollar. Good luck with that.​

Buying and selling (i.e. the status quo) is an alternative to the systems of man? Are you saying the alternative is for people to just take what they want simply because they can? But that's what we already have with buying and selling. There are many cases around the world of people taking more than they need simply because they have the money to do so, while the majority of the world struggles to get even the basics simply because they do not have the money. Your argument just isn't rational when compared to reality.

You are confusing buying with taking. Taking is what people do when they steal, defraud, burgle, loot, mug, extort, etc. Taking is what people do when they don't respect or love others as themselves. Buying is what people do when they can arrive at a mutually fair price with the seller.​

Very true. The same faith it will take to resist the Mark is the same faith it takes to follow Jesus today. The Mark prophecy does not prove Jesus' teachings, but rather Jesus' teachings provide an answer to the Mark. As it is now people can play all kinds of games with their dependency on materialism and still claim their loyalty lies with God. Many people are genuinely deceived; they've grown up in a world where money makes the world go round and so it's very difficult to see beyond the systems of man. For the AC, it's a means of exploiting people's fears and turning them away from God, but God won't mind because he also wants to see what kind of choice people will make; trust in the AC's material provision, or trust in God's provision.

This is the purpose of the Mark; a highly visible, identifiable piece of proof to once and for all make it very clear what God wants. No more games. No more confusion or double speak about motives of the heart etc...you will take it or reject it and the choice will make it clear to everyone who is on which side.

Materialism is bad, and Jesus teaches against it, but materialism is not what the mark of the beast signifies.​

All you're really saying with this word salad is that the prophecy has no specific significance for us in today's modern world. You give no explanation as to how or why these points relate, you make no clear connections, you give no scriptural support. For example the prophecy doesn't say anything about the "old covenant". It doesn't say anything about temple sacrifices. And one can only guess as to what you mean by "Contamination of Christianity". it's just a bunch of spiritual sounding jargon which conveniently leads nowhere. I'm not trying to insult you, but along with Peter and Jude (2 Peter 2:17, Jude 1:12) I'm suggesting there are a lot of people out there claiming to offer water when there is barely a trace of moisture in their doctrines.

The prophecy simply says it will be a Mark in the hand (or forehead) to control buying and selling. All one need do is compare what the prophecy actually says to what's actually happening in world banking right now. A mark in the hand for buying and selling. A microchip in the hand for buying and selling.

It's happening right now.

Word salad? It's a good thing I didn't highlight in BROWN!
Prophecy is for believers. That includes you and me no matter when the prophecy is/was fulfilled, which is why we are not as the Jews, still waiting for the first coming of our Messiah. Just because the prophecy is not about us, doesn't mean we cannot find significance in it for our lives today, provided we understand the prophecy in the way it was intended. Fulfilled prophecy is edifying.​

 

[john darling]

provided we understand the prophecy in the way it was intended

A mark in the hand for buying and selling. A microchip in the hand for buying and selling. The intention of the prophecy is clear.

Materialism is bad, and Jesus teaches against it, but materialism is not what the mark of the beast signifies.

Ok, when the monetary system evolves to the point that cash becomes obsolete and the only way to buy/sell anymore is digitally through a microchip in the hand (which will happen) what will you do? Will you take the microchip?

Taking is what people do when they steal, defraud, burgle, loot, mug, extort, etc. Taking is what people do when they don't respect or love others as themselves.

It's weird how you keep arguing that if someone takes in the name of money then it's okay, as though claiming the "taking" in the name of money justifies greed. Lets say we have 10 people who need food. Seven of them have money while 3 of them have no money. The shop owners sell food to the seven but turn away the 3. Do you think this is consistent with what Jesus taught?

Money does not force commerce, rather it facilitates agreement on price between the buyer and seller.

And yet you yourself dared me to go to the shop asking for what I need just because I need it, without any money to exchange. The implication was that I obviously would not get what I need without the money. Isn't that what you were suggesting?

Either that, or this is just more jargon from you; it's not "force" it's "facilitation", except the "facilitation" only works if people have money, in which case you've not actually said anything to refute my arguments. You are working hard to say that money is not a tool of control to manipulate one another but you can't explain how money actually works, in the real world, without contradicting that point because you know how foolish it will sound to claim that I really could walk into the grocery store and get what I need without being forced to produce money in exchange.

In other words, you want to say that money is not a tool for manipulating greed/fear but the only real-life examples you can give contradict that argument.

 

[Sinthesis]

"john darling, post: 1080942, member: 7650"]A mark in the hand for buying and selling. A microchip in the hand for buying and selling. The intention of the prophecy is clear.

That's one way to interpret it. Go to Ezekiel Chapter 9 to see how a mark was used previously to signify the actual spiritual affiliation amongst those claiming to be God's people.​

Ok, when the monetary system evolves to the point that cash becomes obsolete and the only way to buy/sell anymore is digitally through a microchip in the hand (which will happen) what will you do? Will you take the microchip?

I can think of several good reasons to not get an implant that have nothing to do with endtimes hysteria.​

It's weird how you keep arguing that if someone takes in the name of money then it's okay, as though claiming the "taking" in the name of money justifies greed. Lets say we have 10 people who need food. Seven of them have money while 3 of them have no money. The shop owners sell food to the seven but turn away the 3. Do you think this is consistent with what Jesus taught?

I've never said taking in the name of money is ok. The exchange of money for products/services relates to buying/selling and not taking/giving. The shop owners may or may not provide food to the 3 depending on circumstances, but charity should inform their decision. Regardless, it doesn't demonize their service for those seven with the resources to pay for their food.​

And yet you yourself dared me to go to the shop asking for what I need just because I need it, without any money to exchange. The implication was that I obviously would not get what I need without the money. Isn't that what you were suggesting?

Perhaps, but they might freely choose to give you what you need, or you could threaten them and just take what you need. In either case no money is involved. You could also try bartering.
​

Either that, or this is just more jargon from you; it's not "force" it's "facilitation", except the "facilitation" only works if people have money, in which case you've not actually said anything to refute my arguments. You are working hard to say that money is not a tool of control to manipulate one another but you can't explain how money actually works, in the real world, without contradicting that point because you know how foolish it will sound to claim that I really could walk into the grocery store and get what I need without being forced to produce money in exchange.

In other words, you want to say that money is not a tool for manipulating greed/fear but the only real-life examples you can give contradict that argument.

Money can be a tool for manipulation, but then it operates through seduction, not force.​

 

[john darling]

That's one way to interpret it. Go to Ezekiel Chapter 9 to see how a mark was used previously to signify the actual spiritual affiliation amongst those claiming to be God's people.

Or, I could just look at what the Mark prophecy actually says about the Mark. Buying and selling with the hand. Loyalty to the Beast.

I can think of several good reasons to not get an implant that have nothing to do with endtimes hysteria.

Can you please define which part of any post on this thread relating to the Mark is hysterical? Can you be specific and use actual quotes? I think it would be interesting to see how you are using the word in this context.

Anyway, there are plenty of warnings throughout the NT to watch, to be aware and to be ready so that we are not taken by surprise. You call it hysteria. I call it faithfulness.

The exchange of money for products/services relates to buying/selling and not taking/giving.

The word "take" is not a negative word in itself. You are using it in a negative context. I already acknowledged you were using the word in this way, but then I also questioned why you lump the word "give" in with a negative use of the word "take". I'm not sure if you can actually see how this is a contradiction in your reasoning but I would appreciate it if you would specifically address this point.

The shop owners may or may not provide food to the 3 depending on circumstances, but charity should inform their decision.

Interesting. "Charity should inform their decision". Can you clarify what this means?

Also, lets say the shop owners do decide to be charitable; they won't make any profit from it. If they give too much charity their shop may fail. But if they demand payment in time to save their business then they are not working for love (i.e. charity) anymore, but rather, for mammon.

Regardless, it doesn't demonize their service for those seven with the resources to pay for their food.

It looks like you may be suggesting that Jesus would be demonzing people to correct them for only helping those who have money while refusing to help those who do not have money.

But if people help those who do not have the money to pay for the help they need then they won't make profit and their business will collapse. This is precisely why Jesus said we cannot work for God and mammon (money and the things money can buy) without cheating on one or the other.

Perhaps, but they might freely choose to give you what you need,

Why would they choose to do that when it means they don't make any profit from it? Are they in business to love or to make money? They can't do both.

Money can be a tool for manipulation, but then it operates through seduction, not force.

What do you mean by "it operates through seduction, not force."?

 

[turnorburn]

Says nothing of antichrist. you interpret it so but it does not say it..

My hands are tied reba i can give you the scriptures but i can't bring my witnesses forward, some of those witnesses are self incriminating..

tob

 

[reba]

LOL TOB but with a kind heart...
The scriptural definition of antichrist is only found in the little books of John
Anything more/less is our idea of antichrist.

 

[Sinthesis]

"john darling, post: 1082330, member: 7650"]Or, I could just look at what the Mark prophecy actually says about the Mark. Buying and selling with the hand. Loyalty to the Beast.

Revelation uses language, patterns, and ideas that have precedents found all throughout the other books of the bible, so that the rest of the bible guides and informs our interpretation of Revelation. Ignore this accompanying scripture and one could come up with all kinds of private interpretations.​

Can you please define which part of any post on this thread relating to the Mark is hysterical? Can you be specific and use actual quotes? I think it would be interesting to see how you are using the word in this context.

Anyway, there are plenty of warnings throughout the NT to watch, to be aware and to be ready so that we are not taken by surprise. You call it hysteria. I call it faithfulness.

Watching is fine, provided we're watching for the right things. Expecting the wrong signs is hysteria. Y2K was hysterical.​

The word "take" is not a negative word in itself. You are using it in a negative context. I already acknowledged you were using the word in this way, but then I also questioned why you lump the word "give" in with a negative use of the word "take". I'm not sure if you can actually see how this is a contradiction in your reasoning but I would appreciate it if you would specifically address this point.

Buy/sell are neutral. Take is negative. Give is positive.​

Interesting. "Charity should inform their decision". Can you clarify what this means?

Also, lets say the shop owners do decide to be charitable; they won't make any profit from it. If they give too much charity their shop may fail. But if they demand payment in time to save their business then they are not working for love (i.e. charity) anymore, but rather, for mammon.

Life is not black and white. There are many factors to consider, one of which is charity.​

It looks like you may be suggesting that Jesus would be demonzing people to correct them for only helping those who have money while refusing to help those who do not have money.

But if people help those who do not have the money to pay for the help they need then they won't make profit and their business will collapse. This is precisely why Jesus said we cannot work for God and mammon (money and the things money can buy) without cheating on one or the other.

Nope, that is not what I'm suggesting.​

Why would they choose to do that when it means they don't make any profit from it? Are they in business to love or to make money? They can't do both.

Sure they can. People do it all the time. Remember, life is not black and white.​

What do you mean by "it operates through seduction, not force."?

Churchill: "Madam, would you sleep with me for five million pounds?"
Socialite: "My goodness, Mr. Churchill... Well, I suppose... we would have to discuss terms, of course..."
Churchill: "Would you sleep with me for five pounds?"
Socialite: "Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?!"
Churchill: "Madam, we've already established that. Now we are haggling about the price”
​

 

[Deborah13]

What do you mean by "it operates through seduction, not force."?
Churchill: "Madam, would you sleep with me for five million pounds?"
Socialite: "My goodness, Mr. Churchill... Well, I suppose... we would have to discuss terms, of course..."
Churchill: "Would you sleep with me for five pounds?"
Socialite: "Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?!"
Churchill: "Madam, we've already established that. Now we are haggling about the price”

Excellent example.

 

[turnorburn]

LOL TOB but with a kind heart...
The scriptural definition of antichrist is only found in the little books of John
Anything more/less is our idea of antichrist.

II Thessalonians 2 is another..

tob

*edit: forgot something "again"

Daniel 11:21 - And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries.

 

[Sinthesis]

Daniel 11:21 warns of Antiochus IV Epiphanes through prophecy so accurate that some non-believers argue it must have been written after the fact.

 

[john darling]

Revelation uses language, patterns, and ideas that have precedents found all throughout the other books of the bible, so that the rest of the bible guides and informs our interpretation of Revelation. Ignore this accompanying scripture and one could come up with all kinds of private interpretations.

Nah, all you're really doing is using a proof text to explain away what the mark prophecy actually says about the mark: buying and selling via a Mark on the hand. World banking is quickly moving in the direction of microchip implants in the hand for buying and selling, but you call it hysteria to make the obvious link between the two, instead insisting that we look at other interpretations which create a more spiritualized conclusion thus making the "buying and selling" description of the Mark of no effect.

There really are genuine spiritual lessons behind the mark, but the buying/selling issue is still there, too. You can't expect to see real truth when using one verse to cancel another. All throughout the Revelation there are examples of God's ways and then the counterfeits of the devil. One example is the temple; while God gathers 144k of his faithful followers together into his spiritual temple, the AC makes an agreement with the Jews to rebuild the physical temple in Jerusalem. But God is finished with temples as a sign of where he can be found (Mt 27:51) and now he lives in the hearts of his followers acts 7:48 , acts 17:24-25). The physical temple and any credence given to it's rebuilding as a sign of faith in God is a mockery to this new spiritual kingdom (Rev 11:8). There is the real and the counterfeit.

It's like that with this issue of a seal on the forehead vs a Mark on the hand/forehead. One is real and the other is an imitation, or a mockery. Jesus told us to seek God's kingdom first by working for love. This is real faith. The AC wants us working for money because doing so does not require real faith. Atheists also work for money. While God asks us to put our trust in his kingdom of love and sharing to care for us the AC convinces us to put our trust in materialism via buying and selling. One is real and the other is the counterfeit.

You earlier hinted that you would not take a microchip implant, though you suggested that would be for reasons other than buying and selling. In other words, whatever security or privacy concerns, or whatever other reasons you espouse now for being squemish about taking an implant will eventaully fade away or be overcome by your dependence on money. When it comes to paying the bills, the rent, putting food on the table, clothing, and provision for whatever family you may have, you will take the implant. The arguments you are making now are simply laying the groundwork for searing your concience when that time comes.

I realize I probably come across as sounding quite harsh when I suggest these kind of conclusions from your comments. It is not my intention to be harsh but to address what I see as a fairly serious problem with allowing fear to cloud your judgment. Think about it; a "mark" in the hand for buying/selling. A microchip in the hand for buying/selling. Clearly there is a connection and yet you casually dismiss it as hysteria. Cautious doubt I could understand. Reserving judgment until the evidence is even more clear than it already is I could understand. Prudence can definitely be a good thing.

But what you're doing is decidedly different. It's like you don't want to even consider the connection. Deborah did much the same thing. I posted a link to a Barclays website showcasing a new gadget where shoppers wear a glove for winter shopping which contains a microchip linked to their personal account. Rather than removing their gloves to find their money, they just swipe their hand, the microchip is scanned and the money deducted electronically from their account like any number of "tap-and-pay" methods out there right now. This is not hysteria. This is legitimate technology being promoted by one of the world's leading banking institutions. It doesn't even matter if the gloves come across as a gimmick or fizzle out; the point is that the banks want people using this new technology; they want people getting used to the idea of a microchip in their hand because it means more revenue for them when every transaction is digitally recorded. But how did Deborah respond? She said "so what". It just boggles the mind. No concern. No careful consideration or comparison to what the prophecy says. All your explanations have achieved is to carefully side step the real issue of our dependence on buying and selling. This is precisely why the Mark will be so effective; your arguments make the perfect case for it.

Watching is fine, provided we're watching for the right things. Expecting the wrong signs is hysteria. Y2K was hysterical.

Y2K is very different from a comparison between the Mark and microchip implants. There was absolutely no scriptural support for Y2K; people just love to be titillated sometimes so they contrive interpretations to suit their fears and/or personal desires.

Earlier I asked you to show where this was being done with the Mark on this thread and you avoided doing so. You can't because it's not happening. If anything, the opposite is happening. When explaining living by faith, Jesus talked about not allowing a fear of material needs stop us from stepping out in faith and seeking his kingdom first. This was in the same batch of teachings where he said that we cannot work for God and money at the same time without cheating on one or the other (Mt 6:24). He said we will love one and despite the other. Do you have the courage to believe what Jesus taught?

Buy/sell are neutral. Take is negative. Give is positive.

This is an area where you are being irrational. They are all neutral, just like money itself is neither good nor bad. It is our motivations and how we act on each of these concepts which Jesus is looking at. But in the context of this discussion you declared that taking is bad and giving is good, yet you still lumped taking/giving together into the same argument earlier when you were defending buying/selling.

Giving is synonymous with sharing, which is what the kingdom of heaven is all about. Sharing is very different from buying/selling in that it cannot be said that you are sharing with someone when you demand payment before you will give to them what they need. This is why Jesus made the point about not being able to work for both masters. He said one master is God and the other master is mammon (money and the things money can buy). But you casually dismiss this basic truth with a glib statement about how life is not "black and white". All you've really done is to once again side-step the real issue. That is not faith or courage. It is fear.

 

[john darling]

Churchill: "Madam, would you sleep with me for five million pounds?"
Socialite: "My goodness, Mr. Churchill... Well, I suppose... we would have to discuss terms, of course..."
Churchill: "Would you sleep with me for five pounds?"
Socialite: "Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?!"
Churchill: "Madam, we've already established that. Now we are haggling about the price”

You talked about money working through seduction rather than force. When I asked you to clarify this you give an example of a man paying money to a woman for sex. Is that REALLY what you were getting at with your comment; prostitution?

Well, I suppose it still relates even though I suspect in your own reasoning you were side stepping the issue again with a conversation about a man who seems to take joy in apparently tricking a woman into admitting she's a prostitute.

Anyway, back to your actually comments; the seductive power of money. It's far more than sex for cash, but it's interesting that the Revelation ALSO utilizes this example of prostitution. It's one of those "real vs counterfeit" issues. There is Bride of Christ (the church) and the prostitute. The Bride is faithful and doesn't need money to love the husband. She is the real deal. The prostitute is not faithful. The description of Babylon given in Revelation 18 focuses wholly on one of intense materialism so great that it influences the entire world. She promises love while only caring for money. This is the seductive power of money; it easily gives the illusion of care but one only need to not have any money to see how much care actually exists when it comes to buy/selling. People spend their whole lives working for the illusion, thinking they will die if they don't sell their time for money. They are seduced so thoroughly that nothing, not even God can convince them of the illusion. Work for money; is a well without water and a cloud without rain; empty promises which only appear real so long as you have the money to keep them alive. The prostitute does not give her love without payment. This is what makes the Bride so different.

 

[Deborah13]

Daniel 11:21 - And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries.

Daniel 11:21 warns of Antiochus IV Epiphanes through prophecy so accurate that some non-believers argue it must have been written after the fact.

A bit of history.....
Adam Clarke's Commentary
In his estate shall stand up a vile person - This was Antiochus, surnamed Epiphanes - the Illustrious. They did not give him the honor of the kingdom: he was at Athens, on his way from Rome, when his father died; and Heliodorus had declared himself king, as had several others. But Antiochus came in peaceably, for he obtained the kingdom by flatteries. He flattered Eumenes, king of Pergamus, and Attalus his brother, and got their assistance. He flattered the Romans, and sent ambassadors to court their favor, and pay them the arrears of the tribute. He flattered the Syrians, and gained their concurrence; and as he flattered the Syrians, so they flattered him, giving him the epithet of Epiphanes - the Illustrious. But that he was what the prophet here calls him, a vile person, is fully evident from what Polybius says of him, from Athenians, lib. v.: “He was every man’s companion: he resorted to the common shops, and prattled with the workmen: he frequented the common taverns, and ate and drank with the meanest fellows, singing debauched songs,” etc., etc. On this account a contemporary writer, and others after him, instead of Epiphanes, called him Epimanes - the Madman.

 

[Deborah13]

john darling please notice your name in blue, I tagged you so that you would receive an alert. That is done by putting the @ sign before the members name. That way they know you are addressing them or that they are being talked about in your post.

But how did Deborah respond? She said "so what". It just boggles the mind. No concern. No careful consideration or comparison to what the prophecy says.

Hmm... for some reason you are assuming that I had never heard about this technology before you bringing it up. Or that I may not have considered it, or even thought about it before you brought it up.

Do you have the courage to believe what Jesus taught?

You say if we don't worry about this microchip in the hand we are in fear. What? It seems to me you are the one who is all in a dither about it. Whatever the Lord has in store for the church....
Mat 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Do you have the courage to believe what Jesus taught? Are you part of this church, the body of Christ? If you want to live in fear of man go ahead, that's your choice. I'll just keep my fear to fearing God. The one who can destroy both body and soul.

 

[JohnD]

Says nothing of antichrist. you interpret it so but it does not say it..

Who do YOU interpret the antichrist in Daniel to be?

 

[reba]

Where in Daniel do you see /read antichrist?

 

[JohnD]

Daniel 11:31 (NASB95)
31“Forces from him will arise, desecrate the sanctuary fortress, and do away with the regular sacrifice. And they will set up the abomination of desolation.

Matthew 24:15–18 (NASB95)
15“Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand),
16then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains.
17“Whoever is on the housetop must not go down to get the things out that are in his house.
18“Whoever is in the field must not turn back to get his cloak.

2 Thessalonians 2:3–4 (NASB95)
3Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,
4who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God.

 

[JohnD]

Where in Daniel do you see /read antichrist?

You already said I interpret it that way. So, please answer the question. Who or what do YOU say what I interpret to be the antichrist by a different name in Daniel is?

 

[turnorburn]

A bit of history.....
Adam Clarke's Commentary
In his estate shall stand up a vile person - This was Antiochus, surnamed Epiphanes - the Illustrious. They did not give him the honor of the kingdom: he was at Athens, on his way from Rome, when his father died; and Heliodorus had declared himself king, as had several others. But Antiochus came in peaceably, for he obtained the kingdom by flatteries. He flattered Eumenes, king of Pergamus, and Attalus his brother, and got their assistance. He flattered the Romans, and sent ambassadors to court their favor, and pay them the arrears of the tribute. He flattered the Syrians, and gained their concurrence; and as he flattered the Syrians, so they flattered him, giving him the epithet of Epiphanes - the Illustrious. But that he was what the prophet here calls him, a vile person, is fully evident from what Polybius says of him, from Athenians, lib. v.: “He was every man’s companion: he resorted to the common shops, and prattled with the workmen: he frequented the common taverns, and ate and drank with the meanest fellows, singing debauched songs,” etc., etc. On this account a contemporary writer, and others after him, instead of Epiphanes, called him Epimanes - the Madman.

Close but no cigar..

tob

 

[reba]

And the only place in Scripture antichrist is found is here..... while reading these verses in context antichrist is defined in scripture as 1Jn_2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
none of the verse here describe antichrist as a 'one guy'

we read many antichrists and the spirit of antichrist.


1Jn_2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
1Jn_2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
1Jn_4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
2Jn_1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.