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

[Alive]

6 minutes ago, Justin Adams said:

Yes brother we shall see. I would suggest you not be alarmed if no one takes the bait. Sometimes one is ignored, the hope being that maybe you will go away, or just dissolve. It is how most I have known avoid telling questions... or questions that require logic and actual original thought.

Be careful, Justin—-this is a tad insulting.

:-)

[Justin Adams]

3 minutes ago, Alive said:

Be careful, Justin—-this is a tad insulting.

:-)

Understood. I edited the post.

[WilliamL]

40 minutes ago, Justin Adams said:

Very interesting and concomitant with my reserved views after quite a bit of study. I will sit back and see what happens. Hundreds if not thousands of books and YouTube videos may have to be abandoned entirely...

Oh, how sad. 

I guess people thereafter will just have no choice but to turn to the "strong delusion" to pander to the desires of their hearts. Because that is what most so-called experts on Bible prophecy do: tell them what they want to hear.

[JAG**]

35 minutes ago, Justin Adams said:

Yes brother we shall see. I would suggest you not be alarmed if no one takes the bait.

Sometimes one is ignored, the hope being that maybe you will go away, or just dissolve. 

/Big Grin , , , I know what you mean --- but I honestly did not write the Opening Post and

the follow-up posts as bait -- I really and truly do want to encourage folks to engage in a

personal private study of this subject. I truly believe that is the very best way to approach

the highly controversial subject of Christian Eschatology --- which when debated in threads

always ends up a conglomeration of befuddlement that only the good Lord Himself could unravel.

_______________

 

I may argue a little bit, but I much prefer to "lightly discuss" the subject with a view to

encouraging a personal private study. 

Here is another good source for personal private study:

Postmillennialism: An Eschatology Of Hope.

by Keith A. Mathison

275 pages

___________

In addition to:

The Millennium

by Dr. Loraine Boettner

410 pages

 

Best.

JAG

 

 

``

 

 

Edited July 29, 2020 by JAG**

[Justin Adams]

14 minutes ago, WilliamL said:

Oh, how sad. 

I guess people thereafter will just have no choice but to turn to the "strong delusion" to pander to the desires of their hearts. Because that is what most so-called experts on Bible prophecy do: tell them what they want to hear.

Do you not find that people will believe what they want to? No plain reading of scripture seems to be valid without 'interpretation'.

What? Discard Darby and LaHaye.?  They give me comfort...

[WilliamL]

1 hour ago, JAG** said:

That means that John's antichrist appeared in John's NEAR FUTURE and in fact  John's

epistles clearly support the NEAR FUTURE interpretation.

Most of the NT authors supported the near future belief in the Parousia of the Lord. Peter finally figured it out in his 2nd epistle, just before his death:

2 Peter 3:8 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

Compare that to his first epistle:

1 Peter 4:7 For the end of all things is near; therefore be serious and watchful in your prayers.

The issue, or at least the foremost one, was that Jesus said that John would not die before His return [John 21:22-23]; so His return was expected within the lifetime of John. Even John believed this, because he wrote of "the words of this prophecy [the Book of Revelation] ... the time is near." Rev. 1:3 Based on this belief, the coming of the antichrist was perforce immanent.

Except it wasn't, because John didn't die within the normal lifetime of a man. Because he has not yet "prophes[ied] over many peoples, nations, tongues, and kings." Rev. 10:11

[WilliamL]

4 minutes ago, Justin Adams said:

Do you not find that people will believe what they want to? No plain reading of scripture seems to be valid without 'interpretation'.

What? Discard Darby and LaHaye.?  They give me comfort...

Yup. So sad. The doctrines of men are so much more appealing that those obscure biblical prophecies.

[Alive]

What I have observed before on the forum regarding eschatology; there are a gaggle of individuals on this forum that state adamantly, that the Lord has revealed to them various aspects of the ‘end times’, and yet these individuals are at times very much at odds with one another. Others don’t state emphatically, that the Lord showed them, but rather argue that what they see in scripture is clear, if you read it like it was wrote.

:-)

The LOrd has shown this brother quite a lot over 4.5 decades, but never anything specific on the subject. In fact, I have read the OT prophets and John and Paul a whole bunch over the years—especially Revelation and it has never been opened up to me. I know for a fact, that should the Lord want to, He would.

I have asked him about this and get Nada, but for one interesting bit recently.

[canada]

Yes, two beasts in Revelation ... no "antichrists".

A negative feature of Nero Caesar translated into Hebrew (NrN Qsr) being 666 is that when a "Nun" is a "final"(a last letter) it's value by Hebrew gematria is ...700 by itself so that nullifies Nero as the 666 beast.

Being a Protestant and "reformed", there are a few examples of popes associated with 666 and a mark on their forehead and right hand.

 

Edited July 30, 2020 by canada
addition

[abcdef]

2 hours ago, JAG** said:

Says Dr. Loraine Boettner

 

". . . not one single reference in Daniel or Ezekiel or Paul or the Book of Revelation . . .

which (some) allege refer to the Antichrist is connected in any way with the verses in

the epistles of John that mention the antichrist. All is based on inference. Let the reader

search for himself and see how far-fetched that (alleged) connection is.

 

We make bold to say that this picture of Antichrist as a (future) world ruler . . . is pure fiction,

without so much as one clear supporting verse in all Scripture."

The Millennium, Dr. Loraine Boettner, page 210

 

The Bible mentions Antichrist in only the following 4 verses:

1 John 2:18

1John 2:22

1 John 4:3

2 John 7

 

There is no  Bible-Verse argument for a future Antichrist because . . . .

There is no  Bible-Verse argument that connects these 4 verses with

anything said in Daniel or Ezekiel or Paul or the Book of Revelation.

 

For example:

There is no evidence that the "man of sin" or the "man of lawlessness"

mentioned in 2 Thess. 2:3 is connected in any way with the antichrists

mentioned in the 4 verses in John's epistles.

 

Also note the following from John's epistles that mention antichrist:

 

(1) Antichrist is applied to many persons existing in the first century

1 John 2:18 "even now has there arisen many antichrists"

In the next verse, 1 John 2:19, John identifies the antichrists as

first century Christian apostates "They went out from us, but they

did not really belong to us."

 

(2) In 1 John 2:22 the antichrist is identified as those who deny the

Father and the Son. "This is the antichrist, even he that denies the

Father and the Son." The antichrists were first century apostates.

 

(3) In 1 John 4:3 the antichrist is identified as every one who does

not acknowledge Jesus. It is then said that antichrist "even now is

already in the world" (of the first century).

 

(4) 2 John 7 says that the antichrist is many deceivers that have gone

out in the world (of the first century.) Therefore this verse says that

there are many antichrists, not just one antichrist.

 

What say you?

Jag,

I would say that the Antichrist is Caesar, but not just one, all of them and the "image" Bishops of Rome until this day.

The Antichrist was revealed as Caesar at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

It was revealed then that the iron of the Dan. 2 statue and the 4th beast of Dan. 7 were Caesar and Rome.

-----------------

See how the iron of the statue of Dan.2 and the 4th beast of Dan. 7 last for centuries and not some, 7 or 3 1/2 literal years.

The 3 1/2 times mentioned is also spans centuries, 1900 years.

Not seeing that the time line is centuries and not some 3 1/2 years, distorts the understanding of the time line.

See how both of the Daniel time lines are continual, without any breaks or gaps.

-----------