Interesting things about "antichrist"

[Bold Believer]

1. The term is used a sum total of five times in a sum total of four verses in the entire New Testament, all in the pastoral letters of John (1, 2 3 John). The term is never used (or even referred to) by any of the other NT authors.

2. Despite all of the importance attached to the term by modern evangelical believers, Jesus never used it even once. Would we not think that if such an individual were of such importance, that Jesus would have mentioned it at least once?

3. In 2 Thessalonians 2, the apostle Paul uses the term man of sin to describe an individual or individuals who will be revealed just before the coming of Christ to gather his people. While many well-meaning prophecy teachers equate 'antichrist' and the man of sin, there is no evidence absolutely linking the two terms. Furthermore, since Paul was martyred in 67 AD and John didn't even use the word antichrist until about 95 AD, and there is no evidence to my knowledge that they (Paul and John) ever met one another, there is no reason to link the two terms.

4. Despite the significance attached to 'antichrist' by modern prophecy writers, the term is conspicuously absent in the Book of Revelation. Search though you will, the word is simply not there. People put it there in their teaching. Revelation 13 refers to Nero, whose name added up to 666, not to some future mythical dictator. Does anyone other than myself find it interesting that John never uses the word antichrist in the one book allegedly about the end of all things?

5. John defines the term antichrist:

1Jo 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.

2Jo 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.

How much plainer can John be?

6. John further tell us that what the church was expecting was not a man, but a spirit.

1Jo 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.

1Jo 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

Does John ever define antichrist as a single man? No. In fact, he tells his audience that there are many antichrists. Does John ever define antichrist as a dictator? No, not even in the Book of Revelation, which he wrote.

If John does not, why should we?

7. Despite all modern attempts to assign the number of the beast to a modern individual, nobody fills the bill. Many have tried to to make a modern person out to be 'the antichrist', but they are never correct. That's because they are misapplying the Scripture. The only name that fits is N E R O. The beast is not 'the antichrist'.

8. The term 'the antichrist' is never used in Scripture. The definitive article is not present. It's always simply 'antichrist.'

I invite you to look these things up for yourself, without the writings of prophecy teachers present. It could be that after careful study, you come to the same conclusion I have:

There is no antichrist dictator 666 personage.

[Montana Marv]

Bold

2 Thes 2:3 man of lawlessness. v.4 - He will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so he sets himself up in Gods temple, proclaiming himself to be God.

Rev 13:3 One of the heads of the beast seemed to have a fatal wound, but the fatal wound had been healed. The whole world was astonished and followed the beast. v6. He opened his mouth to blaspheme God. v5.He exercised his authority for 42 months.

Rev 13:18b - His number is 666.

Rev 19:20c - The two of them (beast with the fatal wound and the false prophet) were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur.

Synonymous terms; man of lawlessness, beast who had the fatal wound (#666), the person A/C (not to be confused with the spirit of A/C)

In Christ

Montana Marv

[Guest yod]

The term "beast" represents a kingdom...and all kingdoms are represented by an unclean beast.

For example America is an eagle, Russia is a bear, China is a dragon, etc, etc...

Regarding the verses in Rev 19, it does appear as if it is speaking about a single person that is thrown into the lake of fire, but it also presents the Bride of Messiah as one woman who is dressed in white apparel.

There is certainly precedent for a kingdom to be represented by the person who leads it, but a "Beast" is a dangerous animal and used throughout the bible refering to a kingdom that person leads.

Nero represented Rome, just like Alexander represented Greece, just like Khameini represents a kingdom of Shiite muslims including, but not limited to, Iran or like Obama represents a war-mongering America today.

I do agree with Bold when he says that there are theological linkages between the writings of people living hundreds of years apart that may not be safe to assume. My approach is to only trust what is clearly and LITERALLY said.

I've got no objection to theological speculation, but I acknowledge it as just that....speculation. I put no trust in end-times scenarios from people who view the church as separate from Israel, though they cleverly present their predictions are biblically hard fact. I do believe there is a linkage between the one Daniel speaks of (prince of the people to come) and the "man of perdition", yet also believe it's entirely possible that they are not linked.

Time will tell.

[Montana Marv]

Yod

You stated above: I've got no objection to theological speculation, but I acknowledge it as just that....speculation. I put no trust in end-times scenarios from people who view the church as separate from Israel, though they cleverly present their predictions are biblically hard fact. I do believe there is a linkage between the one Daniel speaks of (prince of the people to come) and the "man of perdition", yet also believe it's entirely possible that they are not linked.

The Church or Body of Christ is made up of both Jew and Gentile. The Church is not Israel, but some from Israel are in the Body/Church.

Rom 11:11,12 - Did they (Israel) stumble so as to fall beyond recovery, Not at all; Rather, because of their transgressions, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious.. But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater will their fullness bring. v.23 - And if they (Israel) do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.

John 15:5 - Jesus says; I am the vine, and you are the branches.

So, if we as Gentiles are in this Body/Church, and we are making Israel envious, We are not one and the same; otherwise were are making ourselves envious.

In Christ

Montana Marv

[Bold Believer]

Yod, Daniel's prince to come from Daniel 9:27 was Titus. Titus was both a general and a prince, being the son of Vespasian the emperor who was in charge at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem.

Marv, the terms you mention are NOT synonymous. Nero was the 666-man number. He was the personification of the nation-beast Rome, which was of course Daniel's fourth and final nation beast.

The man of sin term could be applied to Nero singularly, but also to the state of godless man at the time of the end. Paul's statement that the mystery of iniquity was present may be a reference (backhandedly) to Nero himself. Nero elevated himself above all other gods most certainly and called himself a god and spoke evil against the God of heaven. Daniel called Nero 'the little horn.'

Antichrist and these terms are NOT synonymous. Please read again what I wrote. There IS no 'the' antichrist. Antichrist is not a person, it is a spirit behind the teaching that Jesus didn't come in the flesh. Antichrists were numerous in John's final days, and he states so in his pastoral letters. John never applies the concept of a dictator tothe antichrists he refers to. His antichrists are false teachers (Gnostics).

[other one]

the beast that was, and is not and is to come, comes out of the bottomless pit....... can a nation come out of the bottomless pit.???

How do you make an image of a nation and give it power to talk....

Who worships a country?

Obviously I have a lot more questions than I do answers.

[Bold Believer]

the beast that was, and is not and is to come, comes out of the bottomless pit....... can a nation come out of the bottomless pit.???

How do you make an image of a nation and give it power to talk....

Who worships a country?

Obviously I have a lot more questions than I do answers.

All good questions. Can a nation come out of the bottomless pit? Yes...in the sense of its concept and leadership. When Rome began, it was a republic, but it changed into a Satanically inspired dictatorship. Satan was the one pulling Nero's strings, so in that sense, Rome did come out of the bottomless pit.

The image of a nation comes from its leaders. As I read Rev 13, I see the writer moving seamlessly back forth between Rome, its emperors, and specifically Nero. The first verse refers to Rome. If you we compare the beast of Rev 13:2 with Daniel's fourth beast, the similarities are obvious. Rome has all of the beastly/military qualities of that fourth beast. The invisible power behind Imperial Rome is Satan himself (the dragon) who gifts to Rome the inherent power of his nature (dunamis), gifts to the emperors their seat (thronos), and great authority (mega exousia). If I were writing this as a human, I might use the term 'larger than life' to describe the image of Rome's emperors. They seem like more than they really are to the people of Rome and its subject nations.

Verse 3 speaks of Nero (one of the heads) who received a deadly wound (by his own hand no less), yet Rome (after a brief time of civil war and political strife that threatened to destroy the empire) survived and the world marvelled that the empire was able to come through as it were, unscathed.

Verse 4 says that the world worshipped the dragon (who we know is Satan) which gave authority to the beast. The word used for worship implies a master-slave reationship, like a dog licking the hand of its master. So enthralled with the brute authority of Rome was the unbelieving world, that they unwittingly worshipped Satan in doing so. Did Satan come right out and say "Here I am! Worship me!" Of course not. In being so taken with the authority of Rome, they gave homage to the one behind that authority, whether they realized it or not. They also worshipped Rome itself. Rome was the greatest authority they had ever seen. Not at all unlike the effect Hitler had on the people of Nazi Germany, the Romans worshipped Rome.

It is possible to worship a country? Of course. Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Communist Russia, Hussein's Iraq, present-day Iran, and I would venture to say Cuba, are all examples of modern nations which are adored by their subjects.

Verses 5-7 jump back to Nero who is described as a mouth which speaks greatly (great things) and blasphemes in doing so. Nero was the one emperor who made emperor worship mandatory. While all of the previous emperors did receive some worship, Nero was the one who made emperor worship popular and an art form so to speak. He spoke against God and God's temple (the Church, because God does not dwell in a temple made with hands) and had authority to continue forty-two months. This is the length of the Neronic persecution against the Church (in which Paul was martyred). Nero spoke against God, his tabernacle and those who dwelled in heaven (holy beings). He was allowed to make war upon the saints, and he did for that period of time. He overcame them. The Church was driven underground for its very survival. During that time, Nero was boss over all the known world.

Verse 8 tells a deadly truth: If you were a Rome-lover, your name was not in the Book of Life.

[Montana Marv]

Too All

Nero never sat in the temple of God, he committed suicide. He was not the A/C, he never had a false prophet to make all bow down to him. The book of Revelation was written about 91 A.D..

In Christ

Montana Marv

[Guest yod]

Yod

You stated above: I've got no objection to theological speculation, but I acknowledge it as just that....speculation. I put no trust in end-times scenarios from people who view the church as separate from Israel, though they cleverly present their predictions are biblically hard fact. I do believe there is a linkage between the one Daniel speaks of (prince of the people to come) and the "man of perdition", yet also believe it's entirely possible that they are not linked.

The Church or Body of Christ is made up of both Jew and Gentile. The Church is not Israel, but some from Israel are in the Body/Church.

Rom 11:11,12 - Did they (Israel) stumble so as to fall beyond recovery, Not at all; Rather, because of their transgressions, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious.. But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater will their fullness bring. v.23 - And if they (Israel) do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.

John 15:5 - Jesus says; I am the vine, and you are the branches.

So, if we as Gentiles are in this Body/Church, and we are making Israel envious, We are not one and the same; otherwise were are making ourselves envious.

In Christ

Montana Marv

Right....salvation has come to the gentiles who have been joined to the commonwealth of Israel. That remnant are the natural branches which have not been broken off like "some" were.

The "church" separate from Israel is not a concept found in the scriptures, though I don't deny that there are churches like that.

[Guest yod]

Too All

Nero never sat in the temple of God, he committed suicide. He was not the A/C, he never had a false prophet to make all bow down to him. The book of Revelation was written about 91 A.D..

In Christ

Montana Marv

I'm not into preterism either...but there was an "abomination that leads to desolation" just like the one Yeshua referred to brought by Rome when an altar of zeus (jupiter) was set up in the Temple and sacrices made of pigs.

These things are cyclical and another is coming...