Understand the AntiChrist

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

The term antiChrist is only used in John's letters and doesn't even refer to an individual that would rise up at the end of time to sit as king of a one world government. The Bible says that antiChrist is a description of anyone who denies Jesus as the Anointed One and Son of God that came in the flesh. All this end of the world stuff associated with modern religious "anti-Christ" dogma is BS from a biblical perspective.

The prophecy of Daniel 9 NEVER makes mention of an antichrist. The actual prophecy had perhap a dual fulfillment and scripture and HISTORY tells us that Anticus Epiphanies (google him) as well as an emporer of 1st century Rome's deeds could be attributed to the horn mentioned in Daniel. NO antichrist found there.

We must stop making up doctrine and speak where the Bible speaks and let's not add to it or take away from what it is attempting to convey. The FACT is it never speaks of an end time antichrist individual. Look up EVERY scripture that uses the term antichrist and you will find exactly ZERO that support the popular doctrine of "The Antichrist" people believe today.

NOW..........

When we look at Daniel, we must be careful NOT to take the incorrect stance that the prophecy was speaking of the ends times as we today see them. Daniel's prophecy about the Little Horn is more fitting with Antiochus IV Epiphanes who ruled the Seleucid Empire from 175 BC until his death in 164 BC.

We must also note that John when he pinned what he wrote about antichrist was addressing his comtempories about things they were experiencing or would soon see or experience. It wasn't about some endtime world leader. See his words.

18 Young children; It’s the last hour. And just as you’ve heard, the Antichrist is coming. Why, right now there are many Antichrists; and that’s how we know it’s the last hour. 19 They left us, because they weren’t like us; for if they had been like us, they would still be with us. But [they left], which is proof that they aren’t like us. 20 However, the Holy One has chosen you… but then, you all know that. 21 So, I’m not writing to you because you don’t know the truth, but because you have known it. Why, lies don’t come from the truth. 22 And who’s a liar? It is those who deny that Jesus is the Anointed One. This is the Antichrist: He who denies both the Father and the Son! 23 Whoever denies the Son [also denies] the Father… but he who admits [to knowing] the Son also [admits to knowing] the Father.

 

[Hitch]

The term antiChrist is only used in John's letters and doesn't even refer to an individual that would rise up at the end of time to sit as king of a one world government. The Bible says that antiChrist is a description of anyone who denies Jesus as the Anointed One and Son of God that came in the flesh. All this end of the world stuff associated with modern religious "anti-Christ" dogma is BS from a biblical perspective.

The prophecy of Daniel 9 NEVER makes mention of an antichrist. The actual prophecy had perhap a dual fulfillment and scripture and HISTORY tells us that Anticus Epiphanies (google him) as well as an emporer of 1st century Rome's deeds could be attributed to the horn mentioned in Daniel. NO antichrist found there.

We must stop making up doctrine and speak where the Bible speaks and let's not add to it or take away from what it is attempting to convey. The FACT is it never speaks of an end time antichrist individual. Look up EVERY scripture that uses the term antichrist and you will find exactly ZERO that support the popular doctrine of "The Antichrist" people believe today.

Yup.

 

[David505]

The term antiChrist is only used in John's letters and doesn't even refer to an individual that would rise up at the end of time to sit as king of a one world government...Look up EVERY scripture that uses the term antichrist and you will find exactly ZERO that support the popular doctrine of "The Antichrist" people believe today...We must also note that John when he pinned what he wrote about antichrist was addressing his comtempories about things they were experiencing or would soon see or experience. It wasn't about some endtime world leader. See his words.

18 Young children; It’s the last hour. And just as you’ve heard, the Antichrist is coming. Why, right now there are many Antichrists; and that’s how we know it’s the last hour. 19 They left us, because they weren’t like us; for if they had been like us, they would still be with us. But [they left], which is proof that they aren’t like us. 20 However, the Holy One has chosen you… but then, you all know that. 21 So, I’m not writing to you because you don’t know the truth, but because you have known it. Why, lies don’t come from the truth. 22 And who’s a liar? It is those who deny that Jesus is the Anointed One. This is the Antichrist: He who denies both the Father and the Son! 23 Whoever denies the Son [also denies] the Father… but he who admits [to knowing] the Son also [admits to knowing] the Father.

Thanks TRUTH over TRADITION,

Insofar as John, when he penned what he wrote about Antichrist, was addressing his contemporaries about things they were experiencing, or would soon see or experience, when should we understand that John’s contemporaries had previously “heard the Antichrist is coming (v.18)”?

 

[Cyberseeker]

We must also note that John when he pinned what he wrote about antichrist was addressing his comtempories about things they were experiencing or would soon see or experience. It wasn't about some endtime world leader.

Hi T.o.T.

In your rejection of extreme futurism you may be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I see you acknowledge the possibility of 'dual fulfillment' and you also quote John's 'many antichrists' explanation. Has it not occurred to you that 'Antichrist' prophecies might be graduated over time?

When Jesus said, “When you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place ...” (Matt 24:16) he was drawing a dynamic prophetic picture that would unfold gradually over several fulfilments!

In AD 30 an amazing 1335/1290 day sequence occurred in the ancient calendar climaxing in Messiahs atonement and the abolishment (in God’s eyes) of the former order. Left standing in the Holy place was the high priest who rejected what God had done. He and his altar became the ‘Abomination of Desolation.’

But Jesus also said, “When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies …” (Luke 21:20) Did that happen in AD 30? The answer is no, but what did happen was an ‘overspreading’ of the same abomination every year and every day until AD 66 when Jerusalem was indeed surrounded. The believers, recognising Christ’s words, fled the city and were saved. Some of his words were fulfilled AD 30 and some AD 66-70. It was unfolding gradually!

Now, here is where it gets really interesting. In Marks account of the same prophecy he says,

“When you see the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not to be (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains … For in those days there will be such tribulation as has not been from the beginning of the creation that God created until now, and never will be. And if the Lord had not cut short the days, no human being would be saved." (Mark 13:14-20)

Did a tribulation of such proportion occur in AD 70? (nothing like it from beginning of creation - no human being saved.) Was it that bad? Preterists lean over backwards to paint Jerusalem’s siege as the ‘mother of all tribulations’ but, as bad as it was, it fails to match the description given. True, AD 70 was a fulfilment but, like Antiochus Epiphenes, it was a fulfilment in part and a precursor to something greater to come.

My point is this: There was a fulfillment of Daniels prophecy in 167BC; there was a fulfillment of the abomination in AD30; there was a fulfillment of the tribulation in AD66 and there will be a future fulfillment again. We have had a series of precursors and the full picture is yet to be seen.

 

[Hitch]

We must also note that John when he pinned what he wrote about antichrist was addressing his comtempories about things they were experiencing or would soon see or experience. It wasn't about some endtime world leader.

Hi T.o.T.

In your rejection of extreme futurism you may be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I see you acknowledge the possibility of 'dual fulfillment' and you also quote John's 'many antichrists' explanation. Has it not occurred to you that 'Antichrist' prophecies might be graduated over time?

When Jesus said, “When you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place ...” (Matt 24:16) he was drawing a dynamic prophetic picture that would unfold gradually over several fulfilments!

In AD 30 an amazing 1335/1290 day sequence occurred in the ancient calendar climaxing in Messiahs atonement and the abolishment (in God’s eyes) of the former order. Left standing in the Holy place was the high priest who rejected what God had done. He and his altar became the ‘Abomination of Desolation.’

But Jesus also said, “When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies …” (Luke 21:20) Did that happen in AD 30? The answer is no, but what did happen was an ‘overspreading’ of the same abomination every year and every day until AD 66 when Jerusalem was indeed surrounded. The believers, recognising Christ’s words, fled the city and were saved. Some of his words were fulfilled AD 30 and some AD 66-70. It was unfolding gradually!

Now, here is where it gets really interesting. In Marks account of the same prophecy he says, Did a tribulation of such proportion occur in AD 70? (nothing like it from beginning of creation - no human being saved.) Was it that bad? Preterists lean over backwards to paint Jerusalem’s siege as the ‘mother of all tribulations’ but, as bad as it was, it fails to match the description given. True, AD 70 was a fulfilment but, like Antiochus Epiphenes, it was a fulfilment in part and a precursor to something greater to come.

My point is this: There was a fulfillment of Daniels prophecy in 167BC; there was a fulfillment of the abomination in AD30; there was a fulfillment of the tribulation in AD66 and there will be a future fulfillment again. We have had a series of precursors and the full picture is yet to be seen.

Well the passage Jesus alluded to mentions 'since there was a nation' obviously a reference to Israel. And the complete covenantal destruction of the nation is what was in view.

On the other hand to maintain a literal stance the great tribulation must result in fewer than 8 souls surviving. Do you really expect it to be 'that bad' ?

Another trouble is that what ever came before Christ and whatever comes after, only the genderation then living could possibly commit the regicide, requiring as it did the bodily presence of Christ. And that is the reason given for the judgement.

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

Hi T.o.T.

In your rejection of extreme futurism you may be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I see you acknowledge the possibility of 'dual fulfillment' and you also quote John's 'many antichrists' explanation. Has it not occurred to you that 'Antichrist' prophecies might be graduated over time?


My point is this: There was a fulfillment of Daniels prophecy in 167BC; there was a fulfillment of the abomination in AD30; there was a fulfillment of the tribulation in AD66 and there will be a future fulfillment again. We have had a series of precursors and the full picture is yet to be seen.

No doubt that the "many antichrists" statement is not limited to or only for a specific time period. As per the definition given in scripture of what antichrist is, such a person or attitude can exist at anytime.

As far as an end time event to look forward to, how about some focus on the "Great Multitude" of Revelation being sealed with the breath of God making their robes white.

 

[Cyberseeker]

The Antichrist spirit manifests itself in flesh every so often. Hitler would be an example of that and 6 million Jews in the ovens of Auschwitz would be an example of a 'tribulation.' Is that a fair observation?

I think that if we have "many antichrists" we will have many tribulations. One is a logical corollary of the other. Therefore, if we follow the logic it would be reasonable to expect that 'antichrists' be identifiable throughout church history. Martin Luther thought Antichrist was the medieval popes. The inquisition was the 'tribulation.' Is that a fair observation? I think so.

The problem with the preterist/futurist dispute is that one side relegates Antichrist to the past and the other side locks him into the future. Neither view is right. We need to understand the prophecy of Antichrist as unfolding gradually until a final manifestation just preceding the end of the world/return of Christ.

Cyber

 

[Hitch]

The Antichrist spirit manifests itself in flesh every so often. Hitler would be an example of that and 6 million Jews in the ovens of Auschwitz would be an example of a 'tribulation.' Is that a fair observation?

I think that if we have "many antichrists" we will have many tribulations. One is a logical corollary of the other. Therefore, if we follow the logic it would be reasonable to expect that 'antichrists' be identifiable throughout church history. Martin Luther thought Antichrist was the medieval popes. The inquisition was the 'tribulation.' Is that a fair observation? I think so.

The problem with the preterist/futurist dispute is that one side relegates Antichrist to the past and the other side locks him in the future. Neither view is right. We need to understand the prophecy of Antichrist as unfolding gradually until a final manifestation just preceding the end of the world/return of Christ.

Cyber

Actually the preterist cites John ;

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.


For timing


1 John 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.


and defintion.

 

[reba]

Actually the preterist cites John ;

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.


For timing


1 John 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.


and defintion.

PERF