Who and what is the antichrist?

[Mr GLee]

Was Adam deceived or did he know what he was doing all along?

2 cor 11:3 But I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve by his cunning, your thoughts will be led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ.

Just curious....there's a lot of speculation about what really happened in the garden.

Adam the head is used as the voice of God He was to protect the virtue of Christ, with Eve.

Eve used to represent prophets (Aaron) sent by God using Moses to signify God not seen a picture or parable of Exodus 7

Exodus 7:And the Lord said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.

Establishing two as the witness God has spoken Adam and Eve. . Moses and Aaron. Christ and His bride the church

Satan the father of lying prophets as false apostles or called antichrists .He added to the word of God (neither shall you touch it) as false prophecy. Adam then using Eve as a scapegoat chose to believe the lie. When Eve touched it they both ate .

 

[CrowCross]

Adam the head is used as the voice of God He was to protect the virtue of Christ, with Eve.

Eve used to represent prophets (Aaron) sent by God using Moses to signify God not seen a picture or parable of Exodus 7

Exodus 7:And the Lord said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.

Establishing two as the witness God has spoken Adam and Eve. . Moses and Aaron. Christ and His bride the church

Satan the father of lying prophets as false apostles or called antichrists .He added to the word of God (neither shall you touch it) as false prophecy. Adam then using Eve as a scapegoat chose to believe the lie. When Eve touched it they both ate .

You lost me with that strange connection.

 

[Mr GLee]

You lost me with that strange connection.

Sorry. . Can you see how he used Moses to represent the law of our unseen God and Aaron his prophet. . . the witness of two?

 

[Marty]

I think his references to the antichrist fit perfectly with what is further revealed in Revelation. Revelation gives us a different perspective or view.

You are confusing the beast with the antichrist

 

[CrowCross]

Sorry. . Can you see how he used Moses to represent the law of our unseen God and Aaron his prophet. . . the witness of two?

Not seeing how this relates to A&E.

 

[3 Resurrections]

The mark will be a bit more than a local annual tax contribution at the temple.

Of course it was more than just a yearly tax contribution. I have already stated that everyone without exception coming to Jerusalem from other nations for religious observances in the temple was required by the priesthood to use that abominable Tyrian shekel coin with its images and inscriptions.

God had told Israel long ago in Deuteronomy 7:25-26 that they could not use the silver or gold of graven images which was an abominable, cursed thing which was to be utterly abhorred by them. Yet the high priesthood was not only allowing this corrupt activity to be done, but they were requiring it as the ONLY currency that would be accepted in the temple for sales and purchases of sacrificial items.

To add insult to injury, that onerous exchange fee was charged by the money-changers to everyone who had to swap their foreign currency for the abominable Tyrian shekel coin that was so offensive to God. It was not the Sea Beast which was requiring this. It was the Judean religious leadership of the Land Beast in Judea that was doing this to their own people and to anyone wanting to worship in the temple. The images and inscriptions on that Tyrian shekel coin gave homage to the Roman Sea Beast and its pagan demi-gods.

 

[Arial]

You are confusing the beast with the antichrist

I'm not confusing anything. I am saying what I think is probably true given the whole counsel of God. Is the beast an antichrist? Or is the beast a follower of Christ?

 

[3 Resurrections]

Is the beast an antichrist? Or is the beast a follower of Christ?

There are three Beasts written about in Revelation. Which one are you referring to?

 

[Mr GLee]

Not seeing how this relates to A&E.

God used Adam as he used Moses as if he was in the place of our invisible God. Eve like Aaron a priest used to preach as a priestess.or prophetess.

Satan the father of false prophet, false apostles spoke through Eve used as a false prophet adding to the commandment "neither shall ye touch" it.

Genesis 3: 3-4 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

 

[CrowCross]

Of course it was more than just a yearly tax contribution. I have already stated that everyone without exception coming to Jerusalem from other nations for religious observances in the temple was required by the priesthood to use that abominable Tyrian shekel coin with its images and inscriptions.

God had told Israel long ago in Deuteronomy 7:25-26 that they could not use the silver or gold of graven images which was an abominable, cursed thing which was to be utterly abhorred by them. Yet the high priesthood was not only allowing this corrupt activity to be done, but they were requiring it as the ONLY currency that would be accepted in the temple for sales and purchases of sacrificial items.

To add insult to injury, that onerous exchange fee was charged by the money-changers to everyone who had to swap their foreign currency for the abominable Tyrian shekel coin that was so offensive to God. It was not the Sea Beast which was requiring this. It was the Judean religious leadership of the Land Beast in Judea that was doing this to their own people and to anyone wanting to worship in the temple. The images and inscriptions on that Tyrian shekel coin gave homage to the Roman Sea Beast and its pagan demi-gods.

The part you have been failing to realize surrounds the entire context of the "mark"....as well as the beast.
When you read Rev 13 one see's what has been mentioned in Rev 13 didn't happen in the first century.

There was no authority given over to the beast against every tribe and people and language and nation, and all who dwell on earth.
There was no beast that was mortally wounded by the sword...yet lived.
There was no Beast fire that came down from heaven to earth in front of people,
There was no beast image that could speak.
There was no mark on the right hand or forehead.
People could by and sell in the 1st century with out the coin you mentioned.
Painful sores did not come upon the people who bore the mark of the beast and worshiped its image....(spent your coin)

I could mention a few more things but you should have gotten the point by now.

You coin "theory" doesn't come close to fitting the biblical narrative.

 

[Arial]

There are three Beasts written about in Revelation. Which one are you referring to?

I don't know where you get three. Not saying there are not three. The beast that comes out of the sea, and the beast that comes out of the land and the false prophet are a fakery of Father, Son, Holy Spirit performed by Satan. He is the spiritual force behind all evil. And spiritual does not mean he is not real.

 

[CrowCross]

God used Adam as he used Moses as if he was in the place of our invisible God. Eve like Aaron a priest used to preach as a priestess.or prophetess.

Satan the father of false prophet, false apostles spoke through Eve used as a false prophet adding to the commandment "neither shall ye touch" it.

Genesis 3: 3-4 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

So what????? You're not really saying anything.

Your position is so convoluted I don't even know what you're trying to say.

 

[3 Resurrections]

I don't know where you get three. Not saying there are not three. The beast that comes out of the sea, and the beast that comes out of the land and the false prophet are a fakery of Father, Son, Holy Spirit performed by Satan. He is the spiritual force behind all evil. And spiritual does not mean he is not real.

The three Beasts are the Sea Beast of Revelation 13, the Judean Beast from the Land of Revelation 13, and the Judean Scarlet Beast found in the wilderness in Revelation 13. These three all had different histories and activities. And none of them exist anymore.

It was under the brief 3-1/2 year rule of the Judean Scarlet Beast from AD 66 until AD 70 that various antichrists who had risen to power were each vying with each other for the coveted Daniel 9 "Messiah the Prince" role over Israel. The Judean Beast from the Land (which was also the false prophet of Judea's religious leadership) was rejecting Christ Jesus as the one who had already fulfilled Daniel 9's Messiah who had come in incarnate flesh as the Son of God. That False Prophet Land Beast continued to search for a substitute Messiah instead among the various "False christs" that arose in that first century.

 

[Arial]

The three Beasts are the Sea Beast of Revelation 13, the Judean Beast from the Land of Revelation 13, and the Judean Scarlet Beast found in the wilderness in Revelation 13. These three all had different histories and activities. And none of them exist anymore.

It was under the brief 3-1/2 year rule of the Judean Scarlet Beast from AD 66 until AD 70 that various antichrists who had risen to power were each vying with each other for the coveted Daniel 9 "Messiah the Prince" role over Israel. The Judean Beast from the Land (which was also the false prophet of Judea's religious leadership) was rejecting Christ Jesus as the one who had already fulfilled Daniel 9's Messiah who had come in incarnate flesh as the Son of God. That False Prophet Land Beast continued to search for a substitute Messiah instead among the various "False christs" that arose in that first century.

Does it say Judean Beast or are you reading that into it from your interpretive presuppositions? What changes if you presuppositions are wrong? How would you see it if you did not have those presuppositions?

 

[3 Resurrections]

Does it say Judean Beast or are you reading that into it from your interpretive presuppositions? What changes if you presuppositions are wrong? How would you see it if you did not have those presuppositions?

This is not based on "presuppositions". The wilderness setting for the Scarlet Beast is a well-documented feature in scripture of the Judean topographical landscape - not connected with the Beast which emerged from the sea back in Revelation 13, which was linked with ancient Rome and all those other pagan empires of lion, bear and leopard features that it had (the ancient empires of Babylonian, Medo-Persian, and Greek).

As for the Beast from the Land (tes ges) in Revelation 13, "tes ges" is commonly applied to the Land of Israel in John's writing.

Those two Judean Beasts are also referred to back in Revelation 6:8, when the pale horse brought Death and Hell (Hades - the grave) to plague the fourth part of the earth (tes ges - the land of Israel) to kill with sword, hunger, and death by means of the "BEASTS (PLURAL) OF THE EARTH". This referred to the two Judean Beasts - the Beast from the Land in Revelation 13 (Israel's corrupt religious leadership) and the Scarlet Beast found in the wilderness of Revelation 17 (the revived independent kingdom of Israel which emerged in AD 66 under the Zealot rebellion against Rome) Under the power of those two Judean Beasts, great tribulation and perils came upon those dwelling in the earth (tes ges - the land of Israel).

 

[Josheb]

John describes it as a spirit within people

No, he did not. Go back and re-read it.

You did a good job citing and quoting the four verses in which "antichrist" is mentioned. You did a good job of correctly articulating the criteria John provided. We might debate whether the criteria is exhaustive but for the sake of this op that may not be necessary. One error, however, was the assumption the antichrist is "a spirit within people," and is possible only when "a deceiving spirit within" exists in a person. That is reading into the text things not stated.

All a person needs to be an antichrist is sin.

This should be obvious because the deceiving spirit(s) does not have a deceiving spirit within making it be an antichrist. It does, however, have sin that does so. In other words, Satan did not need any additional spirit within him or to possess him for him to be an antichrist (assuming he was an antichrist). Evil spirits did possess some people throughout the gospels, but people do not need to be possessed by evil spirits to be evil. Sin is all that is needed. Sin is what corrupted the angels-turned-demons that then corrupt some humans.

John makes it clear humans or angels can be antichrists, but he does not state human antichrists are antichrists only because they are possessed. Most who deny Christ are simply deluded. They do not need a spirit within them to delude them. They can delude themselves just fine on their own. I would venture to say sinful flesh does that far more often than evil spirits. Remember: fallen angels are finite, not infinite. They are creatures, not the Creator. They cannot be everywhere at once.

The word "spirit" is not always indicative of an extra-physical creature. Sometimes it simply means the attitude or character of a person. When we talk about things like "team spirit" we are not saying there is an actual spiritual entity governing the team. Look at 1 John 4:6 again. All angels, all spiritual beings come from God simply because God and God alone is the Creator. But having their created origin by the hand/word of God does not mean the "come from" God in terms of their purpose. When John wrote of a "spirit of truth" and a "spirit of falsehood," he is not saying every rebellious spirit has another spirit dwelling within them that goes by the name "spirit of falsehood." If that were the case there would be many spirits of falsehood, not just one. There would be a spirit of falsehood indwelling and influencing every single rebellious angel. There would also be many more spirits of falsehood because there'd be one for every human denying Christ came from God as the Son of God. They would then, therefore, be the most numerous type of angel. Satan is not a denier because some other spirit makes him that way. Satan is a denier because he is dead and enslaved to sin.

 

[3 Resurrections]

All a person needs to be an antichrist is sin.

No, John's specific requirements describing the many antichrists are more than just humanity being sinful. That was a problem as far back as the Fall. The antichrist phenomena were going to arise at a certain point in time and make the claim to be the Messiah themselves, denying that Christ had already done this. Those "false christs" as Christ called them would be claiming "I am Christ" (Matthew 24:5), which was God's own title of "I AM" being asserted by these "false christs".

 

[Josheb]

No, John's specific requirements describing the many antichrists are more than just humanity being sinful.

Prove it.

That was a problem as far back as the Fall. The antichrist phenomena were going to arise at a certain point in time and make the claim to be the Messiah themselves, denying that Christ had already done this. Those "false christs" as Christ called them would be claiming "I am Christ" (Matthew 24:5), which was God's own title of "I AM" being asserted by these "false christs".

All of which is non sequitur. Not single example just posted is said to have been due solely to the influence of a specific separate spirit. Post 57 reads things into the texts that are not stated.

 

[Arial]

This is not based on "presuppositions". The wilderness setting for the Scarlet Beast is a well-documented feature in scripture of the Judean topographical landscape - not connected with the Beast which emerged from the sea back in Revelation 13, which was linked with ancient Rome and all those other pagan empires of lion, bear and leopard features that it had (the ancient empires of Babylonian, Medo-Persian, and Greek).

As for the Beast from the Land (tes ges) in Revelation 13, "tes ges" is commonly applied to the Land of Israel in John's writing.

Those two Judean Beasts are also referred to back in Revelation 6:8, when the pale horse brought Death and Hell (Hades - the grave) to plague the fourth part of the earth (tes ges - the land of Israel) to kill with sword, hunger, and death by means of the "BEASTS (PLURAL) OF THE EARTH". This referred to the two Judean Beasts - the Beast from the Land in Revelation 13 (Israel's corrupt religious leadership) and the Scarlet Beast found in the wilderness of Revelation 17 (the revived independent kingdom of Israel which emerged in AD 66 under the Zealot rebellion against Rome) Under the power of those two Judean Beasts, great tribulation and perils came upon those dwelling in the earth (tes ges - the land of Israel).

It is still presupposition to apply the things you apply to the things you apply them to. There are also other biblical applications.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Prove it.

I would refer you back to Marty's original first post where he listed the only 4 texts which told the saints back then how to identify an antichrist (1 John and 2 John). We are obligated to use his definition in those texts, since he is the one which uses the "antichrist" term.

The "many antichrists" were the same as the "many false christs" which Jesus warned His generation about in Matthew 24:5 & 24-26. Even before the NT finished being written, we have examples of "false christs" who had cropped up in those days, trying to make a claim of being the prophesied Messiah that should come. Some were literally found in the desert making that claim (as Christ had predicted). Some in AD 66 ended up within the temple itself making that claim (also as Christ - and Paul - had predicted).

It is still presupposition to apply the things you apply to the things you apply them to.

I'm going by the Revelation text itself which tells us when each of those three Beasts came into existence and from where they originated, and just how long they would last (which ended in total destruction in AD 70).