Who is the AntiChrist? (Identifying Him)

[Phoneman777]

The only event I am waiting for is when Jesus comes to the Mount of Olives.

Your head is in the sand of conspiracy theories.

Oh, so now the testimony of the ECFs is a conspiracy?

Why is God worried His Word should "fall into the wrong hands"?

For the same reason He didn't want Christ to "fall into the wrong hands" when He told Joseph to take Mary and Jesus down to Egypt - the end of Christianity.

Your conspiracy theories do not make sense.

They make perfect sense to anyone not seduced by Jesuit Futurism, and to anyone willing to take into consideration what the ECFs said instead of their "expert" opinions that are almost TWO THOUSAND YEARS REMOVED from what the ECFs heard first hand.

 

[Timtofly]

It's really all just a matter of history...and a matter of Protestant Historicism.

No, it is a matter of the Holy Spirit, and God's Word. People had opinions, but none of them are relevant today.

 

[Timtofly]

Oh, so now the testimony of the ECFs is a conspiracy?


For the same reason He didn't want Christ to "fall into the wrong hands" when He told Joseph to take Mary and Jesus down to Egypt - the end of Christianity.

They make perfect sense to anyone not seduced by Jesuit Futurism, and to anyone willing to take into consideration what the ECFs said instead of their "expert" opinions that are almost TWO THOUSAND YEARS REMOVED from what the ECFs heard first hand.

You are afraid that pagan Rome would kill a few believers. That is a conspiracy.

Jesus already outright told them they would have persecution, including martyrdom, just for professing Christ. Had nothing to do with how a book of the Bible was "coded" to prevent that foretold event.

 

[Douggg]

I feel it is necessary to aptly refer to it as "Jesuit Futurism" because it was invented by Jesuits. I also feel it necessary to aptly refer to the other as "Jesuit Preterism" because that, too, was invented by Jesuits.

Neither the Bible nor the ECFs taught of a rise of Antichrist during the Pagan Roman empire - they taught Antichrist would rise after the Restrainer - Pagan Rome - fell. Neither did they teach of an end times Antichrist that would arise after a "gap" of centuries.

Because almost every professing Christian is nearly or completely ignorant of church history, they don't understand that both these ideas were spawned from a crisis in catholicism caused by the Protestant Reformation and worldwide Protestant condemnation of the papacy as "Antichrist" which resulted in so many catholics abandoning catholicism for Protestantism, that a "counter-Reformation" was launched. From it, these two doctrines of devils emerged, pointing everyone's fingers of Antichrist accusation to the past, to the future, anywhere but at Rome. It's really all just a matter of history...and a matter of Protestant Historicism

Who started the Pope is the Antichrist belief ? The Protestant Reformers, right ? So the Protestant Reformers are the cause of the reaction of what they are calling Society of Jesus, so called futurism, yes ?

Pagan Rome and Papal Rome are terms that came out of the Reformers movement, not the ECF's before the Reformers, correct ?

Why get bogged down in that stuff. Instead, study the bible of what it has in it. And learn about what the Jews believe about the messiah. Because after all, the function of the coming Antichrist will be that of the King of Israel, thought to be messiah, by the Jews - for a while.

 

[Davy]

I agree that the angels God sends appear as human. But Satan's angels are described in Revelation 9, and you are denying the very Word of God.

Now that's a false accusation.

YOU are the one that is denying God's Word, simply because you have FAILED to study the Book of Joel where God EXPLAINED WHO THOSE LOCUSTS REPRESENT!

Thus by you trying... to mock me, you are actually mocking The Letter that God sent YOU that YOU were supposed to HAVE READ AND STUDIED PRIOR... to getting to that Revelation 9 Chapter!

You have just made yourself look like a buffoon.

 

[Phoneman777]

No, it is a matter of the Holy Spirit, and God's Word. People had opinions, but none of them are relevant today.

See, the difference is your interpretation is subjective based purely on opinion - mine is objective based on historical evidence: Hear England's greatest prophecy teacher, H. Grattan Guinness:

​

"The Fathers held that the Roman empire was the ”let” or "hindrance" (or "restrainer"), referred to by Paul in 2 Thessalonians, which kept back the manifestation of the ”man of sin”. This point is of great importance. Paul distinctly tells us that he knew, and that the Thessalonians knew, what that hindrance was, and that it was then in existence. The early Church, through the writings of the Fathers, tells us what it knew upon the subject, and WITH REMARKABLE UNANIMITY affirms that this “let,” or "hindrance", was the Roman empire as governed by the Caesars; that while the Caesars held imperial power, it was impossible for the predicted antichrist to arise, and that on the fall of the Caesars he would arise. Here we have a point on which Paul affirms the existence of knowledge in the Christian Church. The early Church knew, he says, what this hindrance was. The early Church tells us what it did know upon the subject, AND NO ONE IN THESE DAYS CAN BE IN A POSITION TO CONTRADICT ITS TESTIMONY as to what Paul had, by word of mouth only, told the Thessalonians. It is a point on which ancient tradition alone can have any authority. MODERN SPECULATION IS POSITIVELY IMPERTINENT ON SUC H A SUBJECT."​

​

Sorry, Tim, but you're a "modern speculator" and your contrary opinions may be safely dismissed as Jesuit Futurist nonsense.

 

[Phoneman777]

You are afraid that pagan Rome would kill a few believers. That is a conspiracy.

You telling me you're not aware the ancients feared to even speak under their breath about the fall of the kingdom ruling over them? That even the slightest minutia of suspicion was enough to have one's height lowered precisely by the size of his head?

You think they said, "O, king, live forever" merely out of respect and not absolutely for their health?

Nehemiah feared to appear troubled for any other reason than that such behavior might arouse suspicion?

Of course, that's why Paul refused to write down that once Pagan Rome fell, the Man of Sin would arise!

Jesus already outright told them they would have persecution, including martyrdom, just for professing Christ. Had nothing to do with how a book of the Bible was "coded" to prevent that foretold event.

Paul didn't "code" anything. What he did was attempt to remind them in his letter of what he told them in person instead of just spelling it out. Good gravy, man, the lengths to which you Jesuit Futurists go to remain stubbornly ignorant as to why Paul refused to:

• simply spell out the identity of the Restrainer
• encourage the fledgling church how the "Holy Spirit" has a celestial boot on the Man of Sin
• prevent last day debate about Restrainer's identity caused by stubborn Jesuit Futurists

 

[Phoneman777]

Who started the Pope is the Antichrist belief ? The Protestant Reformers, right ? So the Protestant Reformers are the cause of the reaction of what they are calling Society of Jesus, so called futurism, yes ?

Truth always compels defense of the lie, right?

Pagan Rome and Papal Rome are terms that came out of the Reformers movement, not the ECF's before the Reformers, correct ?

Are we limiting the discussion to "terms" or "ideas"? Because the "ideas" of the ECFs are in line with what we call "Protestant Historicism" and opposed to Jesuit Futurism.

Why get bogged down in that stuff.

It's impossible to get "bogged down" in the truth. The Bible is so clear that "the wayfarer, though fool, need not err therein". If a fool can get it straight, how much more those who profess to follow Jesus?

Instead, study the bible of what it has in it. And learn about what the Jews believe about the messiah. Because after all, the function of the coming Antichrist will be that of the King of Israel, thought to be messiah, by the Jews - for a while.

There is no "coming Antichrist". The papal Antichrist is alive and well and deceiving millions like you to believe in Jesuit Futurism, as well as others who believe in Jesuit Preterism.

 

[covenantee]

Who started the Pope is the Antichrist belief ? The Protestant Reformers, right ?

Wrong.

More than 300 years before the Protestant Reformers. No Darby/Scofield Jesuitized dispensationalized futurist, he.

Antichrist - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"Arnulf (bishop of Orléans) disagreed with the policies and morals of Pope John XV. He expressed his views while presiding over the Council of Reims in A.D. 991. Arnulf accused John XV of being the Antichrist while also using the 2 Thessalonians passage about the "man of lawlessness" (or "lawless one"), saying: "Surely, if he is empty of charity and filled with vain knowledge and lifted up, he is Antichrist sitting in God's temple and showing himself as God." This incident is history's earliest record of anyone identifying a pope with the Antichrist (see Christian Historicism).[45][46][47]"

 

[Douggg]

You telling me you're not aware the ancients feared to even speak under their breath about the fall of the kingdom ruling over them? That even the slightest minutia of suspicion was enough to have one's height lowered precisely by the size of his head?

You think they said, "O, king, live forever" merely out of respect and not absolutely for their health?

Nehemiah feared to appear troubled for any other reason than that such behavior might arouse suspicion?

Of course, that's why Paul refused to write down that once Pagan Rome fell, the Man of Sin would arise!

Paul didn't "code" anything. What he did was attempt to remind them in his letter of what he told them in person instead of just spelling it out. Good gravy, man, the lengths to which you Jesuit Futurists go to remain stubbornly ignorant as to why Paul refused to:

• simply spell out the identity of the Restrainer
• encourage the fledgling church how the "Holy Spirit" has a celestial boot on the Man of Sin
• prevent last day debate about Restrainer's identity caused stubborn Jesuit Futurists

Hi Phoneman777,

There are two verses that we need to focus on.

6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.

7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

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

Verse 6 the what withholdeth - i.e is that the rapture must take place before the verse 4 act of the Antichrist going into the temple, sitting, claiming to be God.

That verse is pretty easy to understand. So let's go on to next verse....

7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

The mystery of iniquity is the spirit of Antichrist - i.e. the spiritual force aimed at convincing men that Jesus is not the messiah, and denies the Father/Son relationship.

So who has been letting that happen? Jesus who has been given all power in heaven and upon the earth (Matthew 28:18) is allowing it to happen. The He is Jesus. Until "He be taken out of the way" is talking about the church, the body of Christ. Again, it comes down to the rapture.

The 2Thessalonians2:4 act will not happen until after the rapture.

How long between the rapture and the 2Thessalonians2:4 act ? We don't know. But we do have the same assurance given to the Thessalonians.

 

[Phoneman777]

Verse 6 the what withholdeth - i.e is that the rapture must take place before the verse 4 act of the Antichrist going into the temple, sitting, claiming to be God.

My friend, why criticize me for using "Jesuit Futurist" when that's exactly where your ideas originated?

I'm sure you're aware Jesuit Futurism claims the "raptura" (translated from the Greek "apostasia") refers to a "falling away" which the Jesuits claim refers to "the church falling away from the Earth to heaven in the last days" after which comes the "last 7 years of tribulation".

No, "apostasia" is where we get the word "apostasy" - the "falling away from the truth" - which is what happened when the Restrainer Pagan Rome fell allowing Papal Rome to rise and drag every stripe and type of paganism you can think of into Christianity.

7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

The mystery of iniquity is the spirit of Antichrist -

If we want to know what is the "mystery of iniquity" we need to compare it to the "mystery of Godliness".

If 1 Timothy 3:16 KJV says the "mystery of Godliness" is the Creator lowering Himself to the level of His creatures - then it just stands to reason the "mystery of iniquity" is the creature attempting to elevate himself to the level of his Creator"...exactly what the papal antichrist claims to do by their own admission.

The 2Thessalonians2:4 act will not happen until after the rapture.

Yes, after the great apostasy came into Christianity, we find the papacy doing all that evil opposing, exalting, sitting, and showing.

How long between the rapture and the 2Thessalonians2:4 act ? We don't know. But we do have the same assurance given to the Thessalonians.

No, Paul's entire point is that the coming of Jesus and our gathering to Him - two events that happen simultaneously on the "that day" and "the day" which is the "day of the Lord" - can't happen until the "apostasia" or the "apostasy in the church".

The best way to avoid seeing how perfectly the papacy fulfills all the identifying marks of the evil Antichrist is to simply ignore the papacy, which is why all of you can't see it.

 

[Douggg]

My friend, why criticize me for using "Jesuit Futurist" when that's exactly where your ideas originated?

I'm sure you're aware Jesuit Futurism claims the "raptura" (translated from the Greek "apostasia") refers to a "falling away" which the Jesuits claim refers to "the church falling away from the Earth to heaven in the last days" after which comes the "last 7 years of tribulation".

No, "apostasia" is where we get the word "apostasy" - the "falling away from the truth" - which is what happened when the Restrainer Pagan Rome fell allowing Papal Rome to rise and drag every stripe and type of paganism you can think of into Christianity.

You are getting mixed up as well as making erroneous statements.

The Day of Christ, i.e. the Day of the Lord does not take place until (1) the great falling away (from believing Jesus is the messiah) in verse 3 and (2) the man of sin revealed in verse 4.

The rapture is not the falling away. The rapture is sudden catching up, the translation of the living in Christ to meet Jesus in the air, and so ever be with the Lord.

1Thessalonians:417 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

Yes, after the great apostasy came into Christianity, we find the papacy doing all that evil opposing, exalting, sitting, and showing.

Catholics believe that Jesus is the messiah. The great apostasy of departing that fundamental belief in Christianity has not happen yet. Will not happen until the Antichrist is anointed the King of Israel, perceived messiah by the Jews.

No, Paul's entire point is that the coming of Jesus and our gathering to Him - two events that happen simultaneously on the "that day" and "the day" which is the "day of the Lord" - can't happen until the "apostasia" or the "apostasy in the church".

Paul was assuring the Thessalonians that the day of the Lord had not yet begun.

The rapture/resurrection event of 1Thessalonians4:15-18, Jesus coming for Christians, is before beginning of the day of the Lord.

 

[Douggg]

The best way to avoid seeing how perfectly the papacy fulfills all the identifying marks of the evil Antichrist is so simply ignore the papacy, which is why all of you can't see it.

The papacy cannot be the Antichrist because...

1. the Antichrist will be a singular individual.
2. the Antichrist must be a Jew in order to be anointed the King of Israel thought-to-be messiah.
3. the religion of the Antichrist must initially be Judaism, for the Jews in error embrace him, thinking he is their long awaited messiah.

 

[Douggg]

Wrong.

More than 300 years before the Protestant Reformers. No Darby/Scofield Jesuitized dispensationalized futurist, he.

Antichrist - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"Arnulf (bishop of Orléans) disagreed with the policies and morals of Pope John XV. He expressed his views while presiding over the Council of Reims in A.D. 991. Arnulf accused John XV of being the Antichrist while also using the 2 Thessalonians passage about the "man of lawlessness" (or "lawless one"), saying: "Surely, if he is empty of charity and filled with vain knowledge and lifted up, he is Antichrist sitting in God's temple and showing himself as God." This incident is history's earliest record of anyone identifying a pope with the Antichrist (see Christian Historicism).[45][46][47]"

Well then, let's say popularized by the reformers - that the pope/papacy is the Antichrist.

 

[Phoneman777]

The Day of Christ, i.e. the Day of the Lord does not take place until (1) the great falling away (from believing Jesus is the messiah) in verse 3 and (2) the man of sin revealed in verse 4.

Yes, obviously, the "day of Christ" aka "day of the Lord" aka "thief in the night" aka "Second Coming" happens after the "falling away" apostasy authored by the papacy aka "man of sin".

The rapture is not the falling away. The rapture is sudden catching up, the translation of the living in Christ to meet Jesus in the air, and so ever be with the Lord.

The word is "apostasia" from which we get "apostasy" - not some "catching away into the air" nonsense. When Paul refers to the dead and living saints rising to meet Jesus, he uses "HARPAZO" - not "apostasia".

Catholics believe that Jesus is the messiah.

Who cares what "catholics" think? We're concerned about "catholic leadership" and the lies about Jesus they teach. Sure, they teach Jesus is "the Messiah" but not the Messiah of Scripture.

Scripture says "He, Himself, also, likewise, took part of the SAME flesh" as we have...the papacy denies Jesus has come "in the flesh - the same flesh as we have" via their doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. Does that sound like the Messiah of Scripture?

They teach salvation is not by virtue of the blood alone - but because God was so pleased with Jesus' obedience that He decided to grant mankind salvation to be disseminated by the papal priesthood to whom they deem worthy. Does that sound like the Messiah of Scripture?

They teach the sufferings of Purgatory can be shortened by a bottomless barrel of "merit" filled by the "good works" of Mary, the saints, and Jesus, with Mary's good works "more efficacious" than those of Jesus. Does that sound like the Messiah of Scripture?

That's sounds like "apostasia" - even to a slow Southerner like me!

The great apostasy of departing that fundamental belief in Christianity has not happen yet. Will not happen until the Antichrist is anointed the King of Israel, perceived messiah by the Jews.

The "Israel of God" are those who "walk by this rule" of the "new creature in Christ Jesus" - those who call Jesus "son of a whore" and "the great imposter" and write in their Talmud that He's "dead in hell boiling in excrement" are not Israel.

The only "Israel" that has anything to do with end times prophecy is the church.

View attachment 45204

Here's what's actually in store for mankind:

 

[Phoneman777]

The papacy cannot be the Antichrist because...

1. the Antichrist will be a singular individual.

And, the "man of God" who's "perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works" refers to just one man. Got it.

2. the Antichrist must be a Jew in order to be anointed the King of Israel thought-to-be messiah.

No where does it say Antichrist will be "king of Israel" because God would never refer to a building in which the sacrifices therein would be a collective, national middle finger in God's face - as the "Temple of God".

The "temple" of 2 Thessalonians 2 in which the Antichrist sits is the "church" aka the Greek "naos" - NOT "HIERON" - which is what the NT repeatedly uses to refer to the church as a "temple".

3. the religion of the Antichrist must initially be Judaism, for the Jews in error embrace him, thinking he is their long awaited messiah.

Antichrist is called the "son of perdition" - the only other person to be called such is JUDAS who started out Christian but turned to serve Satan IN APOSTASY.

John says Antichrist "went out from us" - the church. The papacy arose from within the church but departed from Christ's teachings, yet claims to be Christ's representative on Earth.

 

[Cassandra]

You are getting mixed up as well as making erroneous statements.

The Day of Christ, i.e. the Day of the Lord does not take place until (1) the great falling away (from believing Jesus is the messiah) in verse 3 and (2) the man of sin revealed in verse 4.

The rapture is not the falling away. The rapture is sudden catching up, the translation of the living in Christ to meet Jesus in the air, and so ever be with the Lord.

1Thessalonians:417 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.



Catholics believe that Jesus is the messiah. The great apostasy of departing that fundamental belief in Christianity has not happen yet. Will not happen until the Antichrist is anointed the King of Israel, perceived messiah by the Jews.


Paul was assuring the Thessalonians that the day of the Lord had not yet begun.

The rapture/resurrection event of 1Thessalonians4:15-18, Jesus coming for Christians, is before beginning of the day of the Lord.


View attachment 45204

After the stoning of Stephen, Saul was converted, and the gospel given to the Gentiles. This completes the 70 weeks.

 

[Douggg]

And, the "man of God" who's "perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works" refers to just one man. Got it.

No where does it say Antichrist will be "king of Israel" because God would never refer to a building in which the sacrifices therein would be a collective, national middle finger in God's face - as the "Temple of God".

The "temple" of 2 Thessalonians 2 in which the Antichrist sits is the "church" aka the Greek "naos" - NOT "HIERON" - which is what the NT repeatedly uses to refer to the church as a "temple".

Antichrist is called the "son of perdition" - the only other person to be called such is JUDAS who started out Christian but turned to serve Satan IN APOSTASY.

John says Antichrist "went out from us" - the church. The papacy arose from within the church but departed from Christ's teachings, yet claims to be Christ's representative on Earth.

From your chart, I assume that you are SDA. Which also explains your strong belief that the papacy is the Antichrist.

Jesus does not return to Rome, but to Jerusalem.

In John 5:43, the Jews will embrace another as their King of Israel.

In Mark 15:32, "Christ the King of Israel".

In Matthew 27:37, "Jesus, King of the Jews".

In Matthew 27:42, "the King of Israel".

In John 12:13, "Blessed is the King of Israel that cometh in the name of the Lord."

In John 5:43 "I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive."


The pope/papacy is not qualified to be the Antichrist. The person must be a Jew and his religion initially Judaism.

 

[Douggg]

View attachment 45206After the stoning of Stephen, Saul was converted, and the gospel given to the Gentiles. This completes the 70 weeks.

The 70th week will begin when the Mt. Sinai covenant is confirmed by the prince that shall come.

The confirmation process was stipulated by Moses in Deuteronomy 31:9-13. Basically, it will be a big speech from the temple mount, by the Antichrist - perceived King of Israel messiah by the Jews - that God gave the land of Israel to the children of Israel as theirs forever.

 

[covenantee]

6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.

now - present tense
know - present tense
withholdeth - present tense

Paul was writing in the present tense of an issue of relevance and significance to the Thessalonian Church to which he was ministering.

Nothing to do with a future antichrist or rapture.

7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

doth - present tense
already - present tense
now - present tense
letteth - present tense

Continuation of the present tense of verse 6.

Nothing to do with a future antichrist or rapture.