Who is the antichrist?

[Sparkey]

First of all, the only definition we have in the entire Bible of who the antichrist is, comes from John. Read it:

18 Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour. 1 John 2:18 (NASB)

22 Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. 1 John 2:22 (NASB)

3 and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world. 1 John 4:3 (NASB)

7 For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist. 2 John 1:7 (NASB)
​

The antichrist is anyone who does not recognize the incarnation and deity of Christ!

First, let me state that I believe that Jesus is the Son of God. I believe that he is a man. He was born and "came in the flesh". Okay? Now let's assume that I don't yet understand, like the Apostle Thomas, that Jesus is God. Let's say that light had not yet been turned on for me. So let's say that I don't yet understand that Jesus is God incarnate, that he is divine - but only that he is the Son of God and that he came in the flesh.

Question: Can you show me, using the above scriptures only that the antichrist is anyone who does not recognize the diety of Jesus? Was Thomas an antichrist?

Please don't get me wrong. I'm not making any statement for or against that belief but only that the definition provided by the Holy Spirit has been widely misunderstood and taken to require more than:

1. Jesus is the Son of God (came from God)
2. Jesus is flesh.

Is there something I missed?

 

[Stormcrow]

I'll start with this first:

I'm not making any statement for or against that belief but only that the definition provided by the Holy Spirit has been widely misunderstood and taken to require more than:

1. Jesus is the Son of God (came from God)
2. Jesus is flesh.

Is there something I missed?

22 Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. 1 John 2:22 (NASB)

3 and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world. 1 John 4:3 (NASB)
​

The point John is making in these verses is not merely that Jesus came in the flesh: even atheist historians (and demons) believe that.

If all we had to confess is that a man named Jesus - who claimed to be sent by God - existed, we could all be saved with such a confession. Such a claim requires no faith whatsoever.

John is, instead, making the point that those who are antichrist deny that God came in the flesh: that God incarnate IS Jesus Christ. It's precisely Christ's deity - not merely His humanity - that John is defending and asking His readers to confess here. That's where the rubber of faith meets the road of confession.

Was Thomas an antichrist?

You tell me:

24 And Thomas, one of the twelve, who is called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came;
25 the other disciples, therefore, said to him, `We have seen the Lord;' and he said to them, `If I may not see in his hands the mark of the nails, and may put my finger to the mark of the nails, and may put my hand to his side, I will not believe.' John 20:24-25 (YLT)

​

If the story ended right there, Thomas could - by John's definition - be an antichrist:

18 Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour.
19 They went out from us, but they were not really of us; 1 John 2:18-19a (NASB)

​

Thomas's refusal to believe for lack of proof put him at odds with the other disciples' confession. Fortunately, Thomas's story does not end there:

26 After eight days His disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus *came, the doors having been shut, and stood in their midst and said, "Peace be with you."

27 Then He *said to Thomas, "Reach here with your finger, and see My hands; and reach here your hand and put it into My side; and do not be unbelieving, but believing."

28 Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!"

29 Jesus *said to him, "Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed." John 20:26-29 (NASB)
​

When Thomas saw and touched the Lord, he did not merely recognize Him as a man whom had risen from the dead, but as God Himself. It's the same confession that Paul confirms when he writes:

10 For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers. 1 Timothy 4:10 (NASB)

10 but now has been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel, 2 Timothy 1:10
​

13 looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus,
14 who gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds. Titus 2:13-14 (NASB)

4 But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, Titus 3:4 (NASB)

6 whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, Titus 3:6 (NASB)
​

Peter's confession is similar:

1 Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ: 2 Peter 1:1 (NASB)
​

The apostles all clearly understood and communicated that Jesus Christ IS God, and that - according to John - to deny that was to oppose Him.

Hope this helps.

 

[Sparkey]

First of all, the only definition we have in the entire Bible of who the antichrist is, comes from John. Read it:
18 Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour. 1 John 2:18 (NASB)

3 and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world. 1 John 4:3 (NASB)

I do agree that Jesus was FLESH upon which the Spirit of God was poured out without measure. God is holy, holy, holy and can not so much as look upon sin. Can God be tempted?

There is a difference between believing in the God-Man and believing in the FleshMan (in whom was the Spirit of God) who followed his Father's will. The theology that is advocated by the "GodMan" who does not acknowledge that Jesus was man in flesh IS the very thing that John warned about.

When you addressed John's statement --there were two issues given:

1. Jesus is the Son of God (came from God)
2. Jesus is flesh (came in the flesh)

If all we had to confess is that a man named Jesus - who claimed to be sent by God - existed, we could all be saved with such a confession. Such a claim requires no faith whatsoever," may be true enough --> but it does not address the fact that Johns definition requires belief that Jesus is the Son of God, not some man who claims falsely to be so.

That is not the point that the bible is making. "If all we had to do was confess that a man named jesus claimed to have come from God...

Mat 24:5 KJV - For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.

1John 4:1 KJV - Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

The actual subject that John was talking about was LOVE and while talking about love, he says, "Beloved, understand this..." We're not talking sloppy agape that's just kind of a love everybody and everything and hug a tree --but we are talking about a perfect (or a mature) love and that requires discernment! And that means that we test the spirits --Don't believe every spirit. Don't become prey to those who come your way and say, "Hey, bro! I just had a revelation!"

God does want us to be a loving community but wants us to be loving in a wise manner and to test the spirits. Truth is important. John, who is the Apostle of Love, has some specific instructions for us to be mature in our love. We are commanded, "Know ye the Spirit of God." We are told to test the spirits. How do we do that? Hereby (verse 2) know ye the spirit of God:


HERE IT IS:
Here (what follows) is how we can know if what is being talked about, if what is being taught is from God or not. John is giving us the key to discernment if what is being shared is from God or not: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ is come in the FLESH is of God. Every spirit that confesses NOT that Jesus Christ is come in the FLESH is NOT of God. THIS is the spirit of antichristos.

That is the test --> whatever you are hearing, whatever is being suggested, you can put it through this grid and know from whence it comes --> is it really of the spirit of God? --or-- is it of the spirit that is antichrist (against christ) --against the belief that Jesus is the Anointed (the Christos) of God? Is it a false christ (in the place of the True Christ)?

"Huh?"
The issue here is amazing to me: If it's true it will affirm both that Jesus came from God and that he is human. That Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. Now some, hearing this will say, "What in the world???" "Huh?" "What are you suggestin'" I am saying nothing more than what was said. Notice that these are not my words. I affirm the truth as taught, there is no new gospel here.

Two camps of Gnosticism
In John's time (and it continues today) there was a real heresy being taught called gnosticism. The word Gnostics and gnosticism is based on the root word meaning 'secret knowledge'. It can also be understood to mean 'deep knowledge'. The Gnostics were saying this: It is our job to bring you into deeper truth. Deeper knowledge. And ya gotta understand something. That God is SPIRIT --and anything that is material is perverted and polluted --> therefore God could not have created this world because this world is a corrupt and material world. They were teaching that it was not God that made the world but rather an "emanation" from God, called "God the second" who sent another emanation, called God the third, who then also sent an eimination, God the fourth -- and the Gnostics said that finally somewhere, way down the line, after the 20th or the 30th or 40th emanation -- that god, very far distanced from the true and living God, THAT god is what created this earth.

The secret to enlightenment
Does this sound so extreme, so different? I am currently attending college -- and being trained in what is called (by them) critical thinking. The Gnostics taught that there are bits of spirit that are locked in the soul of humanity and that people need to realize (the Gnostics said) that the material things --matter-- is evil and dangerous and the spirit is trying to get out of and be freed from the physical. And the Gnostics said, "it is our job to give you the secret enlightenment," --that we can become freed from the material. HOW?

Aestheticism
Two ways (they would say): Part of the Gnostics would say, "Through Aestheticism". BEAT YOUR BODY! The Gnostic, Simon the Stylite, "Okay, I'm gonna get away from the material world," and he built a tower that went up 70 feet into the air. He was a mixed up Christian --a Gnostic -- and he went up into the tower and stayed up there for 40 years and never came down. He was influenced by Gnostic thought and he was thinking, "If I can just get away from the material world..."

Marcarian put chains around his body that weighed hundreds of pounds so that whenever he moved as much as he could, he had to crawl on the ground. Trying to keep his body "beaten" and under submission.

Marsipimus stripped off his clothes, went down into a swampy area and sat there naked for four months. Until his body was so eaten and neglected that it was beyond recognition. These guys were in the camp of the Gnostics who said, the only way to be free from the material is to beat and brutally bruise your body and then... your spirit will begin to seep through and be free. They were the Aesthetics.

Epicurianism
There were other Gnostics (a different school of thought) who were more of the Epicurean mindset said this, "Hey listen! The material, since it's all evil --> it doesn't really matter. So Party Hardy! Eat, drink and be merry, it's party time, boys! Do whatever you want in your body. Sin as much as you can. Do whatever you want because the body doesn't matter.

There were 2 camps in Gnosticism --> those who would beat the body and those that would indulge the body but they both based their ideas from this same thought: ANYthing physical, material is evil. Gnosticism was coming into the Christian church rapidly -- and they would say, "Ahhh-ha! Jesus Christ is the SuperGnostic. He has come to free us from the material. "Look how he lived," the Gnostic would say, "He didn't pamper himself." They would say, "look at how free he lived of the material, he had nothing."

Doecitism
"Christian" Gnostics believed that the 'Real God' sent his son to help us be free of the physical but the "Christian" Gnostics had a problem. Did Jesus have a body? If he had a body, according to Gnostic thought, that would make him what? Evil. So they adopted this position that you can read about when you read through church history or when you read the thick books of theology--> they adopted this position called doecitism. The word means "to seem". They were saying that Jesus just seemed to have a body. They said that we (us Gnostics) have secret reports that when he walked on the shore of the sea of Galilee, he left no footprints!

You tell me:

24 And Thomas, one of the twelve, who is called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came;
25 the other disciples, therefore, said to him, `We have seen the Lord;' and he said to them, `If I may not see in his hands the mark of the nails, and may put my finger to the mark of the nails, and may put my hand to his side, I will not believe.' John 20:24-25 (YLT)

​

If the story ended right there, Thomas could - by John's definition - be an antichrist:

18 Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour.
19 They went out from us, but they were not really of us; 1 John 2:18-19a (NASB)
​

I would disagree with your assessment that Thomas the Apostle was antichrist or would have become antichrist and respectfully suggest that the Apostle John meant exactly what he said. Every Apostle of the Lamb was chosen because he walked with Jesus during the full three years of his ministry and witnessed the fact that Jesus came in the flesh. The rest (the meaning) was revealed after. We too can walk with Jesus and are promised the Holy Spirit who will teach all things including that Jesus was the Word (logos) of God and that he is one with his Father.​

 

[Stormcrow]

Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ is come in the FLESH is of God. Every spirit that confesses NOT that Jesus Christ is come in the FLESH is NOT of God.

Well then, whom do you say Jesus Christ is? Again, if He is merely a man upon whom the spirit of God was poured, He is not any different than any other saved human.

It takes as much faith to say "Jesus Christ has come in the flesh" as it does to say YOU have come in the flesh! In other words, none at all.

Furthermore, your view denies the atoning power of Christ's sacrificial death! (Which is why it's heresy!)

Follow this:

If Christ is nothing more than a man upon whom the spirit of God was poured - as you allege - than He is no different than any other man who had the spirit. He would be no better than a prophet (Islam teaches this.)

Yet every prophet in the OT needed the atoning sacrifice to be made for them because of the fallen state of man. Jesus Christ would have needed this, too, being no better than any other OT prophet.

Yet the atoning sacrifice had to be a spotless lamb, free of defect. If Christ were nothing more than a prophet, He would NOT be perfect.

Therefore, His death - however well-intentioned it might have been - would not have the power to save anyone, let alone Himself.

If Christ is not God incarnate (God "in the flesh"), we're all still dead in our sins, as is Christ.

Only God is the savior of mankind:

{3} My God, my rock, in whom I take refuge, My shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold and my refuge; My savior, You save me from violence. 2 Samuel 22:3 (NASB)

{3} "For I am the LORD your God, The Holy One of Israel, your Savior; I have given Egypt as your ransom, Cush and Seba in your place. Isaiah 43:3 (NASB)

{11}"I, even I, am the LORD, And there is no savior besides Me. Isaiah 43:11 (NASB)

{21} "Declare and set forth your case; Indeed, let them consult together. Who has announced this from of old? Who has long since declared it? Is it not I, the LORD? And there is no other God besides Me, A righteous God and a Savior; There is none except Me. Isaiah 45:21 (NASB)

​

So when Jesus claims, {30} "I and the Father are one." 31} The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him. John 10:30-31 (NASB)
and the Jews pick up stones to stone Him for claiming Himself to be equal with God (the sin of blasphemy);

When Peter, Paul and Thomas all affirm His deity by claiming:

"My Lord and my God!",
"our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus",
"our God and Savior, Jesus Christ"

are you suggesting you have some "special revelation" that these men are wrong? That they really didn't understand what they were claiming???
​

If God alone is savior, and Jesus Christ saved us by His sacrificial death, then Jesus Christ can be none other than God incarnate! If He is not, then you and me and everyone else who claims to follow Christ are still dead in our sins.

This is exactly why the carnal mind cannot understand this and why Paul said the preaching of the cross is foolishness to those that are perishing.

Take care in what you believe and why. It will affect your eternity.

For what it's worth.

 

[Stormcrow]

{17} "For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again. {18} "No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father." John 10:17-18 (NASB)

Only God has the power and authority to take life and give it. If Jesus Christ is not God incarnate (God "in the flesh") He would still be in the grave, and we would not be saved.

This principle is so fundamental to the Christian faith, that the enemy will do and say whatever it takes to turn people away from it. The denial of this principle is precisely why John wrote what he did about antichrist and why, wherever this heresy appears, it must be challenged.

IMHO.

 

[Sparkey]

Well then, whom do you say Jesus Christ is?

This isn't personal. It is about who John said Jesus was when he explained about the teaching of antichrist spirits. But since you've asked, I say that Jesus is God. My point is that this specific belief was shown by Thomas and that he was not rebuked but rather treated with understanding and simply given the answer to his need. He needed to see it in the flesh to know. We are joined into the death of Christ and thereby are saved. How much more so when we (still in flesh) are joined into the resurrection and power of our Lord?

You've stated that if Jesus was merely a man upon whom the Spirit of God was poured he is not any different than me or any other saved human . Jesus was conceived by the Seed of the woman when the Holy Spirit came upon her. The promise was given to the seed of the woman. Why did he need to come in the flesh? Because the promise was given to flesh. Adam was the first --made of the dust, Jesus was the second Adam, made of the Spirit and seen in the flesh.

If Christ is nothing more than a man upon whom the spirit of God was poured - as you allege

Don't bear false witness. I have alleged nothing of the sort. I have agreed with John who declared that he came in the flesh. He was tempted (the bible says, "sorely tempted") like as we.

It takes as much faith to say "Jesus Christ has come in the flesh" as it does to say YOU have come in the flesh! In other words, none at all.

Your argument is with John and the Spirit of God, not me. Those are his words. I'm merely quoting and not adding or taking away. Jesus is the Christ. He is the Annointed of God. He alone has seen the Father and was with the Father before the creation of the world. Before Abraham was (his words, not mine) - I AM. But that is not the discernment, not the test that has been given -- if we confess that Jesus came from God and came in the flesh - then that is the Spirit of God speaking through us. There is no need for further explanation and to attack a fellow believer falsely is the result of wrong teaching. All ad hoc personal attacks are prohibited by the TOS.

If you wish to reply to my comments and thoughts -- fine. Deal with the issue and not the person (or your opinion of their beliefs). If you want to know what I believe - ask me. That's okay. But stop putting your words in my mouth and creating strawman arguments that I have not said. Deal with the facts -- Aestheticism, Epicurianism, and especially Doecitism were central belefs of Gnosticism then and now. The definition that was provided by the Holy Spirit, that Jesus came from God and came in the flesh (contrary to what you allege) is only understood by faith, only understood and believed by us through the Spirit of God.

1Jo 4:2 KJV - Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:

I know that this means that your statements affirm this truth and therefore are of God. Why would you try to deny this? The topic, "Who is the antichrist" isn't "Is Jesus God?" It is about the beliefs that form the basis of the antichrist teachings. That Jesus was some kind of GodMan who could not be tempted to sin. He leaned through obedience. He learned. The idea that He was somehow above us and that he did not subject himself to the flesh is ungodly. He became flesh. He became lower than the angels. Jesus was fully man. He died. Jesus died. He did, really. C'mon --you gotta know this, right?

Psa 8:5 KJV - For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.

Hbr 2:5-10 KJV - For unto the angels hath he not put in subjection the world to come, whereof we speak.
But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him?
Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands:
Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing [that is] not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him. But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

Jesus was perfected through sufferings and learned through obedience. He called himself the "Son of Man". That is the issue that John addresses. It is strange to me that John didn't address the fact that Jesus is the Son of God.

Look again -- and this time listen to what the Spirit of God said through John:

Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:


And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God:

 

[Stormcrow]

If Christ is nothing more than a man upon whom the spirit of God was poured - as you allege

Don't bear false witness. I have alleged nothing of the sort. I have agreed with John who declared that he came in the flesh.

Perhaps you can explain, then, what you meant by this:

I do agree that Jesus was FLESH upon which the Spirit of God was poured out without measure.

There is a difference between believing in the God-Man and believing in the FleshMan (in whom was the Spirit of God) who followed his Father's will. The theology that is advocated by the "GodMan" who does not acknowledge that Jesus was man in flesh IS the very thing that John warned about.

Please tell me where I have "born false witness" against you. Please tell me what I got wrong in my summation of your clearly stated view.

Thanks.

 

[Stormcrow]

The theology that is advocated by the "GodMan" who does not acknowledge that Jesus was man in flesh IS the very thing that John warned about.

Virtually EVERYONE acknowledges that "Jesus was man 'in flesh'": even the Koran teaches this! What's so difficult to believe or understand that "Jesus was 'man in flesh'"?!?

The Koran - among others, however - teaches that Jesus was not God: that he was merely a prophet and that Mohammed is Allah's only true prophet!

This is precisely what antichrist does: denies is that GOD was 'man in flesh' (which, by the way, is a redundancy: to be "in flesh" means to be human, from the Biblical point of view).

Let me break this to you gently: if you believe that Jesus Christ was just a man on whom God merely poured His Spirit, then you share more in common - theologically speaking - with Islam, Mormons, or Jehovah's Witnesses, than you do with the body of Christ.

For what it's worth.

 

[Sparkey]

Perhaps you can explain, then, what you meant by this:



Please tell me where I have "born false witness" against you. Please tell me what I got wrong in my summation of your clearly stated view.

Thanks.

Okay - I will. I have repeatedly stated that I believe (as you) that Jesus is God. Why do you fail to hear those statements and put emphasis on the fact that I believe that he is flesh (only)? That is NOT what I said. When I say that upon that flesh was poured out the Spirit of God without measure - you change my words and quote me as having said, "Jesus was merely a human upon whom was poured the Spirit" -- like I said that he was a prophet only -- like I was advocating beliefs other than Christianity. Where have I said that I am a Muslim?

You have stated that my belief (based on the Word of God) requires some "special revelation" that these men (John, Peter, Thomas & Paul) are wrong? That they really didn't understand what they were claiming??? Show me where I said anysuch thing. Jesus himself said that He and His Father are One. To slander me and allege that I have denied this is false accusation. Stop it.

Deal with the fact that John declaed that Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:

This does nothing to deny your theology and I have not attacked you. Stop with the ad hoc (personal) attacks. Again, that is prohibited by your agreement when you joined this forum.

 

[reba]

Okay - I will. I have repeatedly stated that I believe (as you) that Jesus is God. Why do you fail to hear those statements and put emphasis on the fact that I believe that he is flesh (only)?

I am not getting it your posts reads like you believe both...as you state

on the fact that I believe that he is flesh (only)?

Isn't this one of those times when it is black or white.

 

[Stormcrow]

Okay - I will. I have repeatedly stated that I believe (as you) that Jesus is God. Why do you fail to hear those statements and put emphasis on the fact that I believe that he is flesh (only)?

Because He is NOT "flesh only."

{9} For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form, Colossians 2:9 (NASB)

Jesus Christ is the whole package! His name implies His work, character and nature! Jesus Christ has come in the flesh: Jesus Christ is God the Father, God the Spirit and God the Son all in one!

{12} "And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved." Acts 4:12 (NASB)

If God alone is savior, and Jesus Christ is the only name under heaven by which all men must be saved, then Jesus Christ IS God incarnate!

The devil doesn't care whether people believe in Jesus the man. He does care when they start to believe that He is God "in the flesh."

That's the point of John's passages about antichrist!

 

[reba]

This has been an interesting conversation guys. Dont let it get out of hand...

 

[Sparkey]

I am not getting it your posts reads like you believe both...as you state



Isn't this one of those times when it is black or white.

Hi, Reba - thanks for joining the conversation. Can you restate your question, please? I think I'm being misrepresented here.

 

[Sparkey]

Because He is NOT "flesh only."

That's the point of John's passages about antichrist!

I agree with you in your first statement. You have failed to show anything that supports your second statement. Show me where John's statements that are (according to you) the only definition of who the antichrist is -- allege that all must believe as we do -- that Jesus is fully God. Prove to me that Thomas was an antichrist when he doubted the truth. That is not the crux of what John said. You have misinterpreted me. I begin to believe that this is on purpose.

May I be allowed to speak for myself or must your words continually be thrust into my unwilling mouth?

I didn't say that Jesus was flesh only. I said that he came in flesh and that you are alleging that I said that he came in the flesh (only). Stop changing what I said to suite your misunderstanding and let me speak for myself. If you have a question about what I mean, ask it (as you have). Then when I answer - do me the favor of listening to what I say. If you were wrong about what you thought I said, admit it. Do I really need to implore you to speak to me with the same respect that is due all men?

 

[Stormcrow]

Show me where John's statements that are (according to you) the only definition of who the antichrist is -- allege that all must believe as we do -- that Jesus is fully God.

As noted before, His name implies His nature, character and work: Jesus Christ. That's why I asked whom you believe Jesus Christ is.

And I am NOT slandering you. I am trying to get to the bottom line of what you believe.

Why would you take issue with my assessment of John's view of the antichrist if you didn't have a different point of view?

 

[Sparkey]

As noted before, His name implies His nature, character and work: Jesus Christ. That's why I asked whom you believe Jesus Christ is.

And I am NOT slandering you. I am trying to get to the bottom line of what you believe.

Why would you take issue with my assessment of John's view of the antichrist if you didn't have a different point of view?

That's a fair question (finally). Your assessment of John's simple statements require others to believe as you do, not as John declared.

Remember that this John is the very same who said, "Little children - be not decieved: those who do good are good." His assertion doesn't need additional requirements. When I state exactly the same thing that the Word of Truth declares I am declared a heretic. Then you try to make me defend myself while you in the same breath say that you have not slandered me.

It's that allegation and those similar statements that I object to. Why do you think, what causes you to think that I speak heresy when I merely repeat the truth that John declared. Again, your arguement is not with me.

 

[Sparkey]

May I direct your attention to post #145

We are not commanded to suspend our judgment and to allow the simple gospel of Christ be perverted. Jesus spoke the words that his Father gave him. His disciples spoke the words that Jesus delivered to them. That same word is spoken by those who follow him even today. The purpose of the gospel of John is that we may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, and that by believing, we may have life in His Name (John 20:31)

Some have come and like the serpent tried to beguile and use their influence and subtle words to change the simplicity of the Gospel of Christ.

"I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." - Galatians 1:6-9 KJV

No man who says that Jesus is not the Messiah, no angel who claims that Jesus is not the anointed One of God, no doctrine other than the doctrine of Christ, that he came in the flesh --> is of God. That's fairly simple, isn't it?

Others have commented that my belief is well stated. Why I'll ask you the same question - why do you take issue with me? I have no issue with what you have said about Jesus -- I didn't ask you who you think He is and then promptly ignore your reply. When is your apology coming, huh?

Cordially,
~Sparrow

 

[Stormcrow]

Your assessment of John's simple statements require others to believe as you do, not as John declared.

Patently not true. Jesus asked the same question of the disciples and Peter: "Who do men say that I am? Simon: Who do you say that I am?"

We KNOW by the testimony of Peter and the other apostles who Jesus Christ is: His nature, character and work are all wrapped up in His name! This is something so fundamentally known to all the apostles and their disciples, that John didn't need to break it down theologically!

When John writes,

{22} Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. {23} Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also. 1 John 2:22-23 (NASB)
​

he's telling us in the very name he uses to identify Jesus as "the Christ" who Jesus is: God incarnate!

I'm not the one struggling with the simple truth of John's words here.

And if it seems as though I have been aggressive in defending this point, it's because this point is worth defending aggressively!

 

[Stormcrow]

When I say that upon that flesh was poured out the Spirit of God without measure - you change my words and quote me as having said, "Jesus was merely a human upon whom was poured the Spirit"

OK, then I'll simply ask the question: what do you mean when you write, "upon that flesh was poured out the Spirit of God without measure"?

Define that, since that appears to be the sticking point here.

 

[Sparkey]

Patently not true. Jesus asked the same question of the disciples and Peter: "Who do men say that I am? Simon: Who do you say that I am?"

We KNOW by the testimony of Peter and the other apostles who Jesus Christ is: His nature, character and work are all wrapped up in His name! This is something so fundamentally known to all the apostles and their disciples, that John didn't need to break it down theologically!

When John writes,

{22} Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ?[/B] This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. {23} Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also. 1 John 2:22-23 (NASB) [/B]
​

he's telling us in the very name he uses to identify Jesus as "the Christ" who Jesus is: God incarnate!

I'm not the one struggling with the simple truth of John's words here.

And if it seems as though I have been aggressive in defending this point, it's because this point is worth defending aggressively!

So and again you sidestep the issue - saying that the fact that Jesus is God is required by John's message by the mention of his name? That's quite the stretch isn't it? Convenient how you insist that all believe that John meant what you wrongly declare him to say because he mentioned Jesus' name. Why didn't John mention this? We know the spirit of antichrist when we hear anybody fail to mention that Jesus (as we all know) is God? This is known by my very mention of his name and doesn't need to be said. I will omit this critical doctrine here because I want you to read into what I've said and undertand that must believe that Jesus is God and that is the basis for determining if any man is Christian or Antichrist. That's NOT what was said. I've asked you to look at the word of truth multiple times and try to show specifically where you get your teaching about the Doctrine of Christ.

Hbr 5:5-10 KJV - So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee. As he saith also in another [place], Thou [art] a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec. Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared; Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him; Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.

I'll ask again. Where exactly do you see in 1 John chapter 4 the statement that we can base our judgments about others on any belief other than: Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God and every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God. John was talking about Love -- and while talking about love he said, "beloved, hereby ye know the Spirit of God..."

1Jo 4:7-11 KJV - Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love. In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son [to be] the propitiation for our sins. Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another.

If we consider the longsuffering of God to be our salvation -- how much more so shall we bear long with each other? If there then comes a person who believes that Jesus is the Son of Man - that he came in the flesh and that Jesus is sent by God - but does not know (yet) that Jesus is more. What? Shall we then accuse him/her and attack them? Is that what John said to do?