Proposition: There Is No Bible-Verse Argument For A Future Antichrist.

[douggg]

17 minutes ago, JAG** said:

You have no arguments to refute the above --- so you demonize the

message and demonize me personally by accusing me of teaching

false doctrines even though  I have demonstrated to you that good

and true born again Bible believing Christians in the 4 different 

Christian Eschatological camps disagree on the end times passages.

The only person talking about demonizing is you.     I have not used the term, and I have not heard anyone else here use to the term.

Edited August 2, 2020 by douggg

[iamlamad]

44 minutes ago, Last Daze said:

Apostate Israel.  The unfaithful.  The harlot.

Not to mention another, huge, worldwide religion that surrounds Israel today.

Edited August 2, 2020 by iamlamad

[Justin Adams]

One of the reason believers have a hard time understanding scripture is that they have difficulty putting themselves in the context and seeing that the people written to were of that time and place so it related to them in their context.

Satan and haSatan are words scattered all over the place. Satan, as  proper noun, was probably the Nacash on the Gen 3 event. It is not used thus in the Tanakh.

HaSatan, as it is often used, is 'deceiver' and sometimes even just 'messenger' that brings a controversial point of view to the circumstance. This word use of haSatan might NOT even be evil. It is how the word is used that gives context. So really we need to look and see what the word 'antichrist' really means in context and is it a proper noun, or a general description only.

[iamlamad]

17 minutes ago, douggg said:

No what it really means is what I wrote - you don't have a clue as to why them who John was speaking to had already heard that antichrist shall come.

Why don't you explain why they had already heard that antichrist shall come?   a singular person.

 

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.

 

Good question, Douggg! 

 

[iamlamad]

26 minutes ago, JAG** said:

 When we "translate" your comment up there it really means that , , , 

You do NOT have a Bible verse that connects John's antichrists mentioned below , , , 

1 John 2:18

1 John 2:22

1 John 4:3

2 John 7

 

 . . .  with any of these down there?

 

■ Daniel 7

■ 2 Thess 2

■ Revelation 13

■ the book of Revelation 

■ Ezekiel 

■ the "false prophet"

■ the "harlot" 

■ the "beast"

■ the "little horn"

■ the "man of sin" {the "man of lawlessness" -- in  2 Thess 2}

 

The Bible mentions antichrist in ONLY these 4 instances. 

1 John 2:18

1 John 2:22

1 John 4:3

2 John 7

 

So you MUST make a clear and solid CONNECTION between John's antichrists

and other parts of the Bible --- otherwise you have to give up the name "antichrist"

and just issue a proclamation that your  imagined future "evil man" is called whatever

you   want to call him --- just don't call him THE "antichrist" or antichrist. Why not?

Because you have zero Biblical warrant for calling your imaginary future "evil man"

the antichrist or  an antichrist.

 

_____________

 

 

You have no arguments to refute the above --- so you demonize the

message and demonize me personally by accusing me of teaching

false doctrines even though  I have demonstrated to you that good

and true born again Bible believing Christians in the 4 different 

Christian Eschatological camps disagree on the end times passages.

 

JAG

 

PS

You will notice that I have NOT one time insulted a single person in this

thread. ALL the insults have come from you and from the people on your

side.  I have been personally insulted several  times in this thread but have

NOT replied in kind, not even one time --- and nor will I ever.

 

 

So you MUST make a clear and solid CONNECTION between John's antichrists

and other parts of the Bible --- otherwise you have to give up the name "antichrist"

 

This is not a true statement. it is imagination.

[iamlamad]

41 minutes ago, JAG** said:

 You are incorrect.

John expands his antichrists from being one individual to being
a multitude ,"many antichrists", and puts them in the time of the

1st century some 2000 years ago.

1 John 2:18-19
 "Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that

the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come.

This is how we know it is the last hour. ¹⁹They went out from us,

but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us,

they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none

of them belonged to us."
 

Note the particulars in 1 John 2:18-19

"this is the last hour" -- a reference to the time of the 1st Century  some 2000 years ago

"the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come" -- not one "The antichrist" but "many antichrists"

"many antichrists" --- so John's antichrists were plural, many antichrists,  and not just one 

"even now" -- John's antichrists lived in  the time of the 1st century some 2000 years ago

"have come" -- John's antichrists    lived in the time of the 1st century some 2000 years ago

"they went out from us" -- John's  antichrists lived  in  the 1st Century some 2000 years ago

"they would have remained with us" -- John's  antichrists lived in  the  1st century, in the time John lived, some 2000 years ago

_____________

Questions:

{1} When did John's antichrists come? Answer "even now" in the time of the 1st century some 2000 years ago

{2} Again when did John's antichrists come? Answer: they "have come" in the time of the 1st century some 2000 years ago

{3} What was the number of John's antichrist? Answer: "many antichrists" plural and not just one

{4} What did John's antichrist do? Answer: "they went out from us" -- ie they went out from John and the apostles some 2000 years ago

 

Conclusion: John's antichrists were 1st century Christian apostates.

 

 "Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that

the antichrist is coming...

Please tell us: HOW did they hear this?

FROM WHOM had they heard this?

WHY would they be taught this?

Was John mistaken? IS "the antichrist" coming or is he not?" According to John he IS coming.  Why then are you arguing against John? 

[JAG**]

42 minutes ago, douggg said:

It is misleading because your are making a group when there is

no group of antichrist shall come singular plus them who were

displaying the trait(s) of the singular antichrist person.

You are incorrect. John clearly teaches that there is a group

of antichrists in his time of the 1st Century.

John expands his antichrists from being one individual to being
a multitude ,"many antichrists", and puts them in the time of the

1st century some 2000 years ago.

1 John 2:18-19
 "Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that

the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come.

This is how we know it is the last hour. ¹⁹They went out from us,

but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us,

they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none

of them belonged to us."
 

Note the particulars in 1 John 2:18-19

"this is the last hour" -- a reference to the time of the 1st Century  some 2000 years ago

"the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come" -- not one "The antichrist" but "many antichrists"

"many antichrists" --- so John's antichrists were plural, many antichrists,  and not just one 

"even now" -- John's antichrists lived in  the time of the 1st century some 2000 years ago

"have come" -- John's antichrists    lived in the time of the 1st century some 2000 years ago

"they went out from us" -- John's  antichrists lived  in  the 1st Century some 2000 years ago

"they would have remained with us" -- John's  antichrists lived in  the  1st century, in the time John lived, some 2000 years ago

_____________

Questions:

{1} When did John's antichrists come? Answer "even now" in the time of the 1st century some 2000 years ago

{2} Again when did John's antichrists come? Answer: they "have come" in the time of the 1st century some 2000 years ago

{3} What was the number of John's antichrist? Answer: "many antichrists" plural and not just one

{4} What did John's antichrist do? Answer: "they went out from us" -- ie they went out from John and the apostles some 2000 years ago

 

Conclusion: John's antichrists were 1st century Christian apostates.

________________

 

"the singular antichrist person."___Dougggg

There is no such thing as a "singular antichrist person" that is connected in any way with 

this list down below:

■ Daniel 7

■ 2 Thess 2

■ Revelation 13

■ the book of Revelation 

■ Ezekiel 

■ the "false prophet"

■ the "harlot" 

■ the "beast"

■ the "little horn"

■ the "man of sin" {the "man of lawlessness" -- in  2 Thess 2}

So?

So your imagined "evil man" of the future is pure assumption and pure personal speculation

as demonstrated with such as this below:

Here below is a sample of what the fictional "The antichrist doctrine" has produced in the

world today --- wild far-fetched un-Biblical personal assumptions and personal

speculations without so much as one Bible-Verse  to connect John's antichrists with any

other parts of the Bible.

 

Here is an example of the  far-fetched un-Biblical  wild speculation about the future  

fictional imaginary "antichrist" , , , , ,

 

"11. Resurrected Dead? - "Seemed to have a mortal wound" : Some Bible expositors believe

this mortal wound refers to the pagan Roman Empire, which died in the past but will be revived

in the end times. Others say a historical character of the past, such as Nero, Judas Iscariot,

Mussolini, Hitler, or Stalin, will come back to life and fulfill the role of the antichrist in the

end times. Others say the antichrist will actually be killed and then resurrected. Still others

say that perhaps the antichrist will be severely wounded, and Satan will supernaturally heal

this wound. Perhaps he will simply appear to be killed, though he really is not, and through

satanic trickery will appear to be resurrected."

https://www.biblestudytools.com/bible-study/topical-studies/the-rise-of-the-antichrist.html

 

[iamlamad]

1 hour ago, JAG** said:

Agreed. There are many of  them. Islam is one. There are many others. eg Jainism

You quoted my entire Opening Post and them remarked:

"Hmmm. Is there a religion today that denies "the Father AND the SON?"  I know there is."___iamlamad

/just curious , , ,

Question: Do you have a Bible verse that connects John's antichrists mentioned below , , , 

1 John 2:18

1 John 2:22

1 John 4:3

2 John 7

 

 . . .  with any of these down there?

 

■ Daniel 7

■ 2 Thess 2

■ Revelation 13

■ the book of Revelation 

■ Ezekiel 

■ the "false prophet"

■ the "harlot" 

■ the "beast"

■ the "little horn"

■ the "man of sin" {the "man of lawlessness" -- in  2 Thess 2}

 

The Bible mentions antichrist in ONLY these 4 instances. 

1 John 2:18

1 John 2:22

1 John 4:3

2 John 7

 

So we MUST make a clear and solid CONNECTION between John's antichrists

and other parts of the Bible --- otherwise we have to give up the name "antichrist"

and just issue a proclamation that the imagined future "evil man" is called whatever

anyone  wants to call him --- just don't call him THE "antichrist" or antichrist.

 

Why did I post all the above to you?

Because  you quoted my entire Opening Post which is all about what I just posted to you.

 

 

Your whole premise is wrong: John SAID "the antichrist" is coming. 

It is therefore a MYTH that one "MUST" make any solid connection.  Perhaps at best it is a red herring.  It is an argument for the sake of argument. 

[JAG**]

57 minutes ago, douggg said:

 

 

 

I have a chart tracking the arch villain of the end times and you don't.

 

Thank you for posting your chart. I was hoping that someone would start

posting "end time charts." Charts such as that up there greatly helps

demonstrate the truth of my position that there is not a single Bible-Verse 

that makes any connection between John's antichrists and any other parts

of the Bible. 

I invite everybody to carefully study that chart and

they will discover that there is not , , , 

 , , , a single  Bible verse that connects John's antichrists mentioned below , , , 

1 John 2:18

1 John 2:22

1 John 4:3

2 John 7

 

 . . .  with any of these down there?

 

■ Daniel 7

■ 2 Thess 2

■ Revelation 13

■ the book of Revelation 

■ Ezekiel 

■ the "false prophet"

■ the "harlot" 

■ the "beast"

■ the "little horn"

■ the "man of sin" {the "man of lawlessness" -- in  2 Thess 2}

 

The Bible mentions antichrist in ONLY these 4 instances. 

1 John 2:18

1 John 2:22

1 John 4:3

2 John 7

 

So you MUST make a clear and solid CONNECTION between John's antichrists

and other parts of the Bible --- otherwise you have to give up the name "antichrist"

and just issue a proclamation that your  imagined future "evil man" is called whatever

you   want to call him --- just don't call him THE "antichrist" or antichrist. Why not?

Because you have zero Biblical warrant for calling your imaginary future "evil man"

the antichrist or  an antichrist.

 

Your chart fails to make the vital connection. Your chart is nothing more than personal 

assumptions and personal far-fetched speculations.

 

So far the following remains unrefuted:

Proposition: There Is No Bible-Verse Argument For A Future Antichrist.

 

 

 

 

[JAG**]

1 hour ago, douggg said:

  

 

I have a chart tracking the arch villain of the end times and you don't.

 

Your "end time chart"  appears to be very complicated. I tried to see where your

"end time chart" took into consideration the following wild far-fetched

personal speculations about your fictional imaginary "arch villian" of the

"last days" --- but I could not find it on your chart. Can you find it?

Start quote.

Regarding the imaginary antichrist , , , 

"11. Resurrected Dead? - "Seemed to have a mortal wound" : Some Bible expositors believe

this mortal wound refers to the pagan Roman Empire, which died in the past but will be revived

in the end times. Others say a historical character of the past, such as Nero, Judas Iscariot,

Mussolini, Hitler, or Stalin, will come back to life and fulfill the role of the antichrist in the

end times. Others say the antichrist will actually be killed and then resurrected. Still others

say that perhaps the antichrist will be severely wounded, and Satan will supernaturally heal

this wound. Perhaps he will simply appear to be killed, though he really is not, and through

satanic trickery will appear to be resurrected."

https://www.biblestudytools.com/bible-study/topical-studies/the-rise-of-the-antichrist.html