Who is Paul discussing in 2 Thessalonians 2?
- Thread starter CTK
- Start date
-
- Tags
- daniel paul revelation
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
It does matter. He is not going to literally return riding a white horse with a literal sword coming out of His mouth, so you can't say that Revelation 19:11-21 can't be referring to the same thing as Acts 1:11. The manner in which He ascended to heaven was visibly and bodily and that is the manner in which He will descend from heaven, also.
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
This is a ridiculous way of interpreting scripture. Acts 1:11 says He will return literally from heaven in the literal like manner as He literally ascended there. That His ascension was not described with symbolism in Acts 1:9-11 is irrelevant.
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
The description of Acts 1 doesn't exactly match 1 Thessalonians 4:16, either. This is not how to interpret scripture. Each passage that refers to the one and only future second coming of Christ from heaven contains varying levels of detail regarding that event. With the way you interpret scripture we should expect Jesus to come from heaven at least 10 times in the future.
Really???? OK, if you say so.
Go to this post earlier on in the thread.
Why are the pictures presented differently?
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
Do I come across as someone who doesn't say what he means?
I do say so and you should listen to me because you need help understanding scripture.
There is no reason to try to compare every detail of each passage. In Acts 1:11 it is just pointed out that one aspect of His second coming would match one aspect of His ascension, which is that He will descend from heaven in like manner as He ascended there. The manner in which He ascended was visibly and bodily and He will descend from heaven visibly and bodily. That doesn't mean every other detail of His ascension has to exactly match every single detail of His second coming. By interpreting scripture in this way, you should believe that Jesus will return at least around 10 times because interpreting scripture the way you do makes it impossible to relate any two verses or passages directly to each other.
Did you look at the pictures?
I say you didn't which means to me you are someone who come across as someone who doesn't say what he means
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
How do you ever relate any two verses or passages directly together when you are requiring that they contain the exact same details in order to be related? Your approach to interpreting scripture is ridiculous. Do you ever ask God for wisdom (James 1:5-7) or do you just stick to your flawed man-made methods of interpreting scripture?
Stop your lies. In no way, shape or form have I done or said anything to warrant this false accusation.
Scripture is clear that only a remnant will be saved. Isaiah 10:22; Romans 9:27.
That's not a majority. The majority will not be saved.
So why are you talking about "The majority of Jews today"?
Last edited:
Understanding 2 Thes.2:3 in biblical context, is in two parts. Both parts must be interpreted correctly in order to understand the true prophetic fulfilment.
The KJV interprets the first part correctly with the words "a falling away".
As for the second part, one must discern by the Holy Spirit, (and not decipher by grammar) whether that man of sin is to be understood in the singular or in the plural.
2 Thes. 2:4
Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
We can safely conclude that "a falling away" is in reference to "and that man of sin", as being the subject that shall fall away.
So then, the words: "a falling away" implies that there are MANY people that shall fall away. But, if it be only ONE person that shall fall away, then the context doesn't support that conclusion, simply because the words "that man of sin" can be understood in the plural just as equally as it is understood in the singular.
By the Holy Spirit within me, I understand the words: "and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition" to be in the plural.
Why?? There are more than one person who is "the son of perdition [destruction]".
In fact, there are MANY who are the son of perdition that SHALL "fall away".
Yes, that is correct, there are MANY antichrists, NOT just only one! The reason for the many is because it is "that spirit of antichrist" that infects many. 1 John 4:3.
Did you know that in the KJV Bible, one will NOT find the words written: "THE Antichrist".
Last edited:
- Jul 11, 2015
- 8,721
- 1,759
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
Argument from silence fallacy. If the concept is there, using "the" is valid. John does isolate a singular, future AC so in English that AC can be called "the AC" as in "that specific AC".
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.
- Jul 11, 2015
- 8,721
- 1,759
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
No, it is singular. It is changed by some to plural to make it into something else rather than the singulat man it is speaking of.
The Man of Steel is Superman. What if someone said that can be plural so instead of one Superman, there were many?
It is man of sin, not men of sin in that verse.
Part 1 of 2
Does 1 John 2:18 Predict One Future Antichrist?
John writes:
“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 2:18
Some argue that the words “antichrist shall come” establish one specific future individual who must appear shortly before Christ returns. They then refer to this expected person as “the Antichrist.” However, John’s full statement points in a different direction. He begins by referring to something his readers had already heard:
“You have heard that antichrist is coming.”
But John does not then tell them to wait for one future man. He immediately explains how that warning was already being fulfilled:
“Even now are there many antichrists.”
His conclusion is:
“Whereby we know that it is the last time.”
The presence of many antichrists—not the future arrival of one final person—is the evidence John gives that the last time had already begun.
No One Changed the Word into a Plural
The plural expression “many antichrists” was not added by a translator or changed by someone attempting to avoid a singular Antichrist.
The Greek text itself says:
polloi antichristoi
“many antichrists”
John deliberately moves from the antichrist expectation his readers had heard about to the many antichrists already present among them. Therefore, the plural is not an interpretation imposed upon the verse. It is John’s own language.
The singular and plural are not contradictory. “Antichrist” can describe the character, principle, or identity, while “many antichrists” identifies the numerous individuals in whom that principle was already operating. We use language this way regularly. We may speak of “the deceiver” as a type or identity while recognizing that many people can act as deceivers. The singular can name the character; the plural identifies those who embody it.
The Surrounding Passage Identifies the Antichrists
John does not leave us to speculate about who these antichrists were. In the next verse he says:
“They went out from us, but they were not of us.” —1 John 2:19
These antichrists had emerged from within the professing community of believers. They were not described as future military rulers, global politicians, or one man appearing thousands of years later. They were false teachers connected with the church in John’s own day.
John then defines their central error:
“Who is a liar but he that denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denies the Father and the Son.” —1 John 2:22
Notice his wording:
“He is antichrist.”
John does not say that such a person merely resembles a future Antichrist. Anyone who denies the true identity of the Father and the Son expresses the antichrist character.
John’s Other References to Antichrist
John is the only New Testament writer who uses the actual word antichrist. Therefore, his other uses should control how the term is understood.
1 John 4:3
“Every spirit that confesses 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.”
This verse is especially important. John identifies what his readers had heard was coming as:
“the spirit of antichrist.”
He then says:
“Even now already is it in the world.”
That does not sound like John is directing attention exclusively toward one distant future man. The antichrist spirit was already present and working through false teachers.
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.”
Again, John begins with a plural:
“Many deceivers.”
He then says that the one who fits this description is “a deceiver and an antichrist.” John consistently applies the word to people and teachings already operating within the religious world.
Part 2 of 2
What About “The Antichrist”?
Even where English translations use the phrase “the antichrist,” the article does not prove that John is identifying one final end-time individual. A singular expression can identify a category, character, or recognized adversarial principle. The decisive question is not whether an English translation uses the word “the,” but how John himself explains the expression.
John explains it through:
- many antichrists;
- false teachers who had gone out from the church;
- those who denied the Father and the Son;
- those who denied that Jesus Christ had come in the flesh;
- and the spirit of antichrist already present in the world.
The New Testament Warns of an Existing Apostasy
Other New Testament passages also warn that the great danger would arise within the professing people of God rather than suddenly appearing as one unrelated political figure at the very end.
Paul warned the Ephesian elders:
“Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.”—Acts 20:30
The corruption would arise from within.
Paul also wrote:
“For the mystery of iniquity doth already work.”—2 Thessalonians 2:7
Whatever final development Paul expected, the lawless principle was already active in the apostolic period.
Jesus warned:
“Many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.” —Matthew 24:11
And again:
“There shall arise false Christs, and false prophets.” —Matthew 24:24
The consistent warning is not limited to one future deceiver. It concerns an expanding religious deception embodied in many persons and eventually expressed through a powerful system.
Daniel Identifies the Central Prophetic Enemy
The larger problem with focusing almost entirely upon a supposed future individual called “the Antichrist” is that it can distract us from the power God actually described in detail through Daniel. Daniel 7 and Daniel 8 devote a significant amount of prophecy to the little horn. God did not give only a vague title. He revealed:
- where this power would arise;
- when it would arise;
- from which kingdom it would emerge;
- the religious setting in which it would operate;
- its unusual appearance;
- its proud claims;
- its opposition to God;
- its persecution of God’s people;
- its attempt to change times and laws;
- its attack upon the sanctuary and truth;
- its conflict with the Prince of princes;
- and the length of time during which it would exercise authority.
The little horn is not merely defined by whether someone openly says, “I oppose Christ.” Its opposition is more subtle and dangerous. It rises within the history of the professing religious world, claims spiritual authority, changes what belongs to God, persecutes His people, and works against Christ while claiming to represent Him. That corresponds closely with John’s warning that antichrists arose from within the community:
“They went out from us.”
It also corresponds with Paul’s warning that the apostasy would arise within the temple of God and that the mystery of lawlessness was already working. Therefore, the biblical picture is larger than one future evil individual. John identifies an antichrist spirit already operating through many antichrists. Paul identifies a mystery of lawlessness already at work that would develop into a greater apostate power.
Daniel identifies the prophetic little horn, describing its origin, timing, claims, actions, persecution, and attack upon God’s truth and law. These passages do not require three unrelated villains. They are describing different aspects and stages of the same continuing opposition to Christ and His people.
The Real Issue
Calling someone “the Antichrist” is not an argument from silence merely because the exact title does not appear in every translation. But the claim must still be demonstrated from the text. First John 2:18 does not provide that demonstration. John does not isolate one future man and then explain his career. Instead, he turns immediately to many antichrists already present, identifies them as false teachers arising from within, and defines antichrist by denial of the true Christ.
The danger of insisting upon one future Antichrist is that people may spend their time searching for a final political personality while overlooking the religious power Daniel described so carefully—a power that would arise in history, oppose God from within the religious world, alter His truth and law, persecute His people, and continue until divine judgment.
The individual whom Scripture asks us to recognize prophetically is not established by attaching the English title “the Antichrist” to 1 John 2:18. He must be identified by the full prophetic description God has already provided. That description is found most fully in the little horn of Daniel 7 and 8.
No......what IS singular IS "that spirit of antichrist", of which infects and corrupts many people, not just one.
Most all of church-ianity has misunderstood the application of how it is that all people who remain to be "the natural man" are also "that man of sin, the son of perdition", of which is everyone who "does not have the Spirit of Christ". Rom. 8:8-9.
Last edited:
TribulationSigns
Well-Known Member
- May 1, 2023
- 2,864
- 1,014
- 113
- 57
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
You are getting warmer. I have been teaching that the horn in Scripture symbolizes power. The little horn represents a short period of a greater apostate power — a continuation of the same opposition against Christ and His Church that has been working throughout history, but intensified immediately before the Second Coming - especially after God has finished sealed all of His Elect first.
It is a short season when the mystery of iniquity or lawlessness is brought into greater revelation, allowing many of the Elect to recognize that the appointed season has arrived and that Christ’s return is near. This is what the symbolism of the little horn points to.
And yes, this has nothing to do with the premillennial interpretation that teaches the little horn is a single individual man they believe will be Antichrist figure with supernatural power. That interpretation overlooks the broader biblical pattern of horns representing kingdoms, powers, and authorities that oppose God’s people.
Sorry, there is no "little horn" to come now or in any future. The prophecy about the "little horn" was fulfilled and fleshed out in the man named Antiochus IV Epiphanes.
You can read the historic account about the 2300 days in the book of 1&2 Maccabees.
Today, the Jews still celebrate Hanukkah about Judas Maccabeus. He and his army restored the temple, in which Antiochus committed "the abomination that maketh desolate".
Do you know of anyone that did something in likeness to Judas Maccabeus, about the Restoration of a temple also? One that isn't made of stone.
Through the book of Daniel, such a person pointed to that historic time of Jewish history.
Does anyone here understand how to apply "type and anti-type" in the bible?
Last edited:
Similar threads
