Thread: Is There To Be One Individual As THE Anti-Christ?
Admin
Is There To Be One Individual As THE Anti-Christ?
Posted : 4 Sep, 2010 04:08 PM
Is There To Be One Individual As THE Anti-Christ?
On http://www.the-highway.com/Scofield.html
it says:
"Dispensationalists hold that the appearance and reign of the
Anti-Christ takes place during the seven year period after the
Rapture. At the end of the seven years Christ returns with His saints,
defeats and destroys the Anti-Christ and his armies in the battle of
Armaggedon, and sets up an earthly kingdom in Jerusalem over which He
rules in person for 1000 years. The reign of Christ on earth at that
time according to Scofield, will be a sitting on the throne of David,
as King of the Jews, literally, strictly and politically understood.
This Futuristic theory of the Anti-Christ propagated by Dr. Scofield
is the Popish view. "Alarmed by the fact that the Reformers were
pointing to the Pope as the Anti-Christ, the Jesuit Ribera at the end
of the sixteenth century, invented or at least propagated futuristic
views of the Anti-Christ, and pointed to a solitary Infidel
Anti-Christ who would appear in the dim future. Ribera�s view soon
infected the High Church party. J. N. Darby caught the contagion, and
finally Dr. D. L. Scofield swallowed the Jesuit�s pill. Thus Ribera
succeeded beyond his wildest dreams, for the attention of thousands of
Protestants became deflected from the Papacy, a future Infidel
Anti-Christ was looked for, and the historic Protestant view handed
down by the Reformers was despised by many. These are the hard facts
of history. A Protestantism saturated with Ribera�s Futurism is not
the Protestantism of the Reformers, nor is it feared by the Papacy."
(The Roman Anti-Christ by Rev. F. S. Leahy)."
Lets see what the Apostle John says in his letters about Anti-Christ.
2 John 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."
1 John 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."
1 John 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."
1 John 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."
The word "spirit" is not in the Greek text. In the Textus Receptus,
from which the King James Version was mostly translated, it says:
http://www.olivetree.com/cgi-bin/EnglishBible.htm
kai {AND} pan {ANY} pneuma {SPIRIT} o {WHICH} mh
omologei ton {CONFESSES NOT} ihsoun {JESUS} criston {CHRIST}
en {IN} sarki {FLESH} elhluqota {COME,} ek tou {OF}
qeou {GOD} ouk {NOT} estin {IS:} kai {AND} touto {THIS}
estin {IS} to {THAT tou {OF THE} anticristou
{ANTICHRIST,} o {[OF] WHICH} akhkoate {YE HEARD} oti {THAT}
ercetai {IT COMES,} kai {AND} nun {NOW} en {IN} tw {THE}
kosmw {WORLD} estin {IS IT} hdh {ALREADY.}
Textus Receptus Greek text:
kai pan pneuma o mh omologei ton ihsoun criston en sarki elhluqota ek
tou qeou ouk estin kai touto estin to tou anticristou o akhkoate
oti ercetai
kai nun en tw kosmw estin hdh
Westcott-Hort Greek Text: kai pan pneuma o mh omologei ton ihsoun ek
tou qeou ouk estin kai touto estin to tou anticristou o akhkoate
oti ercetai kai nun en tw kosmw estin hdh
The Westcott-Hort leaves out criston or Christ. It also leaves out en
sarki elhluqota, in (the) flesh come (or came). Remember that the
Westcott-Hort Greek text was used for almost all the modern New
Testament translations.
But like the Textus Receptus the Westcott-Hort leaves out a word
between touto estin to tau and antichistou, or this is that (blank)
of the Anti-Christ.
That what of the Anti-Christ? The Interlinear Greek-English New
Testament, by George Ricker Berry, 1958, for 1 John 4: 3 inserts the
word "power" between "this is that" (and) "of the Anti-Christ."
The King James Version inserts the word "spirit," which I believe is a
little better fit for the context.
I know that John in 1 John 2: 18 says "as ye have
heard that antichrist shall come." But is John talking about one single
individual who will be THE Anti-Christ, or is he describing an office, or better,
a concept called Anti-Christ? Lets see what John Gill says about 1 John 2: 18,
which may give us some indication of what Protestant Christians believed about
Anti-Christ before the arrival of dispensationalism in the 19th century. John Gill lived from
1697 to 1771. He says:
"And as ye have heard that antichrist shall come;
or "is coming"; and begins to show himself in the false teachers and deceivers, who were his forerunners; and this they had heard and understood, either from the words of Christ in (John 5:43) ; or from the account the Apostle Paul gave to the Thessalonians concerning him, (2 Thessalonians 2:3,4,7-10) ; or rather it may be from what, the apostle had said to the elders of the church at Ephesus, where the Apostle John now was, when he met them at Miletus, (Acts 20:29,30) ,"
It is not real clear what Gill is saying here. But he tells us that Anti-Christ begins to show himself in the false teachers and deceivers, although he also says "who were his forerunners."
Then Gill says "Whereby we know that it is the last time;
the pure apostolic age was now going off, with the doctrines, discipline, and worship of it, which was easy to be discerned by the multitude of antichrists which now appeared; and it may well be thought to be the last time, or near the end of things with us, since almost every heresy is revived among us."
A concept of the spirit of Anti-Christ would describe what John Gill is saying. The spirit of Anti-Christ is beginning to show himself, or itself, in the false teachers who appeared at the end of the apostolic age.
Adam Clarke is clear in his commentary on 1 John 2: 18 that Anti-Christ is an office, construct, power or spirit, rather than one single person. Clarke lived from 1760 to 1832. He says:
" Antichrist shall come
Who is this antichrist? Is he the Emperor Domitian, the Gnostics, Nicolaitans, Nazareans, Cerinthians, Romish pontiffs, person, thing, doctrine, system of religion, polity, opposed to Christ, and to the spirit and spread of his Gospel, is antichrist. We need not look for this imaginary being in any of the above exclusively. Even Protestantism may have its antichrist as well as Popery. Every man who opposes the spirit of the Gospel, and every teacher and writer who endeavours to lower the Gospel standard to the spirit and taste of the world, is a genuine antichrist, no matter where or among whom he is found. The heresies which sprang up in the days of St. John were the antichrist of that time. As there has been a succession of oppositions to Christianity in its spirit and spread through every age since its promulgation in the world, so there has been a succession of antichrists. We may bring this matter much lower; every enemy of Christ, every one who opposes his reign in the world, in others, or in himself, is an antichrist; and consequently every wicked man is an antichrist. But the name has been generally applied to whatever person or thing systematically opposes Christ and his religion.
Many antichrists
Many false prophets, false Messiahs, heretics, and corrupters of the truth.
Whereby we know that it is the last time.
That time which our Lord has predicted, and of which he has warned us. "
Nowhere in the letters of John does he say there is to be one
Anti-Christ in the final days. He talks about many Anti-Christs being in existence,
running around, and about the power or spirit of Anti-Christ. It is
the spirit of Anti-Christ that Christians have to deal with in the
John Gill (1697-1771) in his commentary on II Thessalonians 2: 3 - on the man of sin - says that
"so here it intends the whole hierarchy of Rome, monks, friars, priests, bishops, archbishops, cardinals, and especially popes, who may well be called "the man of sin", because notoriously sinful; not only sinners, but sin itself, a sink of sin, monsters of iniquity, spiritual wickednesses in high places: it is not easy to reckon up their impieties, their adulteries, incest, sodomy, rapine, murder, avarice, simony, perjury, lying, necromancy, familiarity with the devil, idolatry, witchcraft, and what not? and not only have they been guilty of the most notorious crimes themselves, but have been the patrons and encouragers of others in sin; by dispensing with the laws of God and man, by making sins to be venial, by granting indulgences and pardon for the worst of crimes, by licensing brothel houses, and countenancing all manner of wickedness; and therefore it is no wonder to hear of the following epithet, "
He says the man of sin is the "whole hierarchy of Rome," not one individual person.
Then, Adam Clarke (1760-1832) says the man of sin in II Thessalonians 2: 3 refers to:
"The same as the Hebrew expresses by ish aven, and ish beliyaal; the perverse, obstinate, and iniquitous man. It is worthy of remark that, among the rabbins, Samael, or the devil, is called ish beliyaal veish aven, the man of Belial, and the man of iniquity; and that these titles are given to Adam after his fall. "
I have used these two - John Gill and Adam Clarke - for their take on the man of sin because they lived before dispensationalism took over much of evangelical Christianity. Almost alwayst he interpretation of dispensationalists on prophecy is too specific. They believe almost everything in the Bible must be literal. They cannot understand how Paul could use the term "man of sin" unless he were talking about one particular individual.
Of course, there are in every age outstanding and much more powerful individuals who are dominated by sin and who claim to be Christians and may be church leaders.
The man of sin, Clarke is saying, is a condition of being dominated by sin.
The son of perdition is found in John 17:12. This is Judas Iscariot, one of the disciples of Christ, who betrayed Jesus to the Pharisees, who themselves were examples of the man of sin.
John 17: 12 is part of the prayer of Jesus to the Father. " While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled."
The dispensatiomnalists would have us all believe that only secular or political types of leaders can be sinful, while, in fact, the greater sin is when those who claim to be of God work against God's plan, as the Pharisees did. However, God arranges things so that all works toward his ends.
I think that the "whoever denies Jesus came in the flesh" thing is exhibited in their "original sin" doctrine. Some believe that sin is passed down from parents to children, so to believe that Jesus was totally sinless, they have to make Mary sinless also(very unbiblical), and say that Jesus was not born with our nature. I think that denies that Jesus came in the flesh. I could have their beliefs wrong though..I'm not exactly an expert on original sin....and it seems to change a lot.....
